-
binaryFate
GUI v0.16.0.2 is now available on getmonero.org
-
ErCiccione[m]
Is there any "known issue" in this release? If there is something i will add it to the download page
-
xmr-pr
moneromooo-monero opened pull request #6703: daemon: don't print "(pruned)" for coinbase txes
-
xmr-pr
-
sarang
More good news on the CLSAG front
-
sarang
I heard back from ph4r05 regarding Trezor support
-
sarang
and they said that the Trezor-side CLSAG code is already done and reviewed
-
sarang
So once a block height is set and the Monero code is merged, they will only need to do a small client PR to enable it
-
moneromooo
Great.
-
sarang
I'd also like to revisit the "upgrade checklist" idea that I brought up a while back
-
ErCiccione[m]
The upgrade checklist is a good idea. We could have a public one using github's project board
-
ErCiccione[m]
or anything else really. But all of us are already on github
-
sarang
Yeah... I like the idea of a checklist, and the release doesn't happen until the items are done
-
sarang
This reduces the reliance on specific unwritten knowledge and could reduce the small errors that happen
-
sarang
and when errors do happen, things can be added to the checklist so they don't happen again
-
ErCiccione[m]
Yeah i agree.
-
sarang
This upcoming release could be a great opportunity to try it out, since it sounds like there are few major changes and plenty of time expected for the ecosystem to prepare
-
sarang
(ideally)
-
moneromooo
I think pony shared it already. Not sure where it is though :D
-
sarang
So useful!
-
sarang
heh
-
sarang
"Trezor support ready" and "Ledger support ready" should go on it
-
sarang
:D
-
sarang
I haven't heard back about Ledger yet
-
ErCiccione[m]
I don't think hardware wallets should be blockers for a release. I mean, it's their duty to keep up, we shouldn't be stuck because one of them is not ready to upgrade. I agree hardware support is important, but what happens when many hardware wallets will support Monero? We wait until all of them are ready before releasing?
-
ErCiccione[m]
That could create a situation where companies just get lazy because "we are waiting for them anyway"
-
ErCiccione[m]
I agree it's important to have hardware support along with a network upgrade and we should do everything we can to make that happen, but i don't think we should wait for them to be ready. Should be the other way round
-
sarang
Sure, but a best-effort approach with adequate time is important for users
-
sarang
If it doesn't happen (for whatever reason), users get screwed over
-
sarang
With CLSAG, having code ready in advance and communicating with the teams has been very useful and productive
-
ErCiccione[m]
yeah i agree with that, and users will know they should probablyh choose a different hw who can keep up with network upgrades
-
sarang
But I see about not letting that be a blocker if there's no action
-
sarang
At the very least, giving plenty of time acknowledges that those teams have different development workflows and timelines
-
sarang
"We set the block height; you have a week to release firmware" is no good
-
sarang
as an extreme example, that is
-
ErCiccione[m]
yeah, absolutely
-
sarang
Maybe a useful part of the checklist is assigning roles specifically
-
sarang
e.g. for this release, sarang is assigned the role of planning and communication with hardware wallet teams
-
sarang
This could help avoid the "nobody did it" problem
-
ErCiccione[m]
yeah. That should be probably the case for everything else
-
ErCiccione[m]
somebody write release notes, somebody send the email in the mailing lists, etc
-
sarang
for sure
-
sarang
Avoid the bystander problem
-
sarang
At meetings, there's a specific list of what's to be done, and who is in charge of doing it (or assigning elsewhere)
-
sarang
It seems like a reasonable balance of ensuring things get done, without causing unnecessary red tape
-
selsta
18:41 <ErCiccione[m]> That could create a situation where companies just get lazy because "we are waiting for them anyway" <-- what is the other solution? do a new release every time?
-
selsta
realistically we have to wait for them to avoid doing multiple releases
-
ErCiccione[m]
No. What i mean is that they should have plenty of time and there should be a lot of communication, but we shouldn't depend on them.
-
ErCiccione[m]
as i said now it's two companies, but in the future will be more and IMO waiting for everybody to be prepared is not feasible
-
sarang
Having a more established and regular process could help this... if a company knows that they need to do steps XYZ prior to a release (with good communication), then they know that failure to do so means the network could leave them behind
-
sarang
On that note... any other thoughts on when this upgrade should (roughly) be planned for?
-
sarang
There doesn't seem to be any need to rush things, except for the cost of less efficient transactions in the meantime
-
ErCiccione[m]
maybe we could have a dev meeting to discuss that? the last one was some time ago.
-
sarang
I would think so
-
ErCiccione[m]
sunday 19?
-
ErCiccione[m]
people in the channel what about a meeting? ^
-
sarang
I'm down for that
-
sarang
As long as there's a specific agenda of items to discuss and figure out
-
ErCiccione[m]
yeah. Point one Network upgrade date and what needs to go in. Point 2 write down a checklist. Point 3 CLSAG audit status and general status?
-
ErCiccione[m]
point 4?
-
sarang
Meta repo issue!
-
sarang
I use them for all MRL meetings, even though it's a standing agenda
-
sarang
(good for log posting too)
-
ErCiccione[m]
I think that agenda would be enough btw. I would make a meeting even just to decide an official date for the HF
-
sarang
Point 4. Blockers and their status
-
ErCiccione[m]
yeah i'm gonna make one now
-
sarang
e.g. we know where Trezor is already
-
sarang
waiting for Ledger info
-
sarang
FWIW there's already Ledger-specific code in the CLSAG branch, but I don't know what needs to be done for their firmware, how much lead time they need after setting block height, testnet requirements, etc.
-
ErCiccione[m]
wait, before i make the issue let's see if other people are ok with a meeting on July 19th
-
sarang
I presume they'll want as much testnet time as possible
-
sarang
roger
-
sarang
ping hyc selsta moneromooo etc.
-
selsta
so meeting next sunday? ok
-
sarang
Oh, was the intent next Sunday or tomorrow Sunday ErCiccione[m]?
-
sarang
e.g. 12 July or 19 July
-
sarang
s/e.g./i.e./
-
moneromooo
Sure.
-
ErCiccione[m]
next sunday (19th). I guessed people would want to know about it a bit in advance
-
sarang
sure
-
ErCiccione[m]
usual time 17 UTC ok for everybody?
-
sarang
sure
-
sarang
that time seems to work for many people
-
sarang
meta issue?
-
ErCiccione[m]
yeah i'm writing it right now
-
sarang
:D
-
ErCiccione[m]
-
ErCiccione[m]
sarang ^
-
ErCiccione[m]
feel free to suggest edits and items
-
sarang
Thanks