04:45:38 -xmr-pr- xiphon opened pull request #6715: wallet2: throw a error on wallet initialization failure
04:45:38 -xmr-pr- > https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/6715
05:15:38 -xmr-pr- xiphon opened pull request #6716: wallet2_api: implement runtime proxy configuration
05:15:38 -xmr-pr- > https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/6716
07:12:11 <ErCiccione[m]> Could somebody post the logs of yesterday's meeting on getmonero?
14:24:00 <sarang> I heard back about the impact of the proposed upgrade schedule on Ledger integration
14:24:32 <sarang> and am told that the integration of CLSAG into their application can't be done by September 17, but may be done by October 17
14:24:47 <sarang> and that no one else on the Ledger team can work on the Monero application at the moment
14:25:06 <hyc> I don't suppose their app is open source?
14:25:13 <dEBRUYNE> It is
14:25:28 <hyc> so if necessary, someone else could write the update
14:25:33 <dEBRUYNE> https://github.com/LedgerHQ/app-monero
14:25:45 <sarang> It is, and I'm writing back to ask if the relevant branch containing CLSAG work is posted anywhere
14:26:02 <dEBRUYNE> sarang: Honestly, I find that answer a bit frustrating
14:26:14 <hyc> so end users can build it and install it themselves?
14:26:14 <sarang> I need clarification, since my understanding was the necessary changes are already done, and just need to be rebased/merged at the appropriate time
14:26:16 <dEBRUYNE> The company has boatloads of funding, yet no one can supposedly work on an important upgrade for one of the more popular coins
14:26:34 <dEBRUYNE> hyc: Yes, but needs to be compiled, which is a PITA
14:26:50 <sarang> Anyway, I'll ask for further clarification
14:27:07 <sarang> I assume that there would not be consensus to delay the proposed timeline?
14:27:47 <hyc> I don't see a problem with October. the last hardfork was November1 wasn't it?
14:28:03 <dEBRUYNE> Accomodating plenty of time for third-party wallets to upgrade is one thing, having to postpone it for a few months because one provider cannot work on it is another
14:28:03 <hyc> with PoW changeover on Nov 30
14:28:08 <sarang>  I mean only because it's now unknown if Ledger would be ready
14:28:22 <dEBRUYNE> hyc: Release was Nov 1 afaik and actual fork date Nov 30
14:28:28 <hyc> yeah that's what I meant
14:28:46 <hyc> so another release on Nov 1 seems fine to me
14:29:33 <dEBRUYNE> But last year we kind of had to postpone stuff because we weren't ready
14:29:46 <dEBRUYNE> As far as I can see, we (+ the ecosystem) can be ready in two months, give or take
14:31:13 <sethsimmons> Personally, if Ledger can't be ready with a huge heads up/runway, we push ahead with clear messaging on why ledger support is lacking at HF
14:31:37 <sethsimmons> Very clearly mentioning it in all messaging about the release, as well as providing estimates on the Ledger-support update afterwards.
14:32:02 <sethsimmons> And just make it abundantly clear that we gave them a huge heads up but they weren't able to meet it, not that Monero itself failed to integrate it etc.
14:32:25 <dEBRUYNE> I don't see that as an option either to be honest
14:32:27 <hyc> all that's going to do is irritate everyone. what's the benefit of an approach like that?
14:32:42 <ErCiccione[m]> We already set teh date keeping in consideration that they needed more time. I'm strongly against moving the date up because of ledger. I agree with dEBRUYNE
14:32:50 <dEBRUYNE> There will be tons of support requests every day as well as frustrated users
14:32:55 <sarang> I'll ask what the _earliest_ possible schedule could be in order to guarantee support
14:33:07 <sethsimmons> Then do we just delay until every wallet has full support on all network upgrades?
14:33:11 <sarang> without promising that there will be support for such a schedule
14:33:12 <sethsimmons> Seems like a slippery slope IMO
14:33:28 <hyc> we only have trezor and ledger to worry about at the moment
14:33:34 <hyc> is trezor ready to go already?
14:33:36 <dEBRUYNE> hyc: MyMonero too
14:33:41 <dEBRUYNE> They have to make changes for CLSAG afaik
14:33:56 <dEBRUYNE> sethsimmons: I was more thinking of assisting Ledger with some stuff so we can move the timeline up
14:33:56 <sethsimmons> Probably Cake and Monerujo as well
14:34:00 <hyc> don't they just use monero's libs?
14:34:06 <sethsimmons> <dEBRUYNE "sethsimmons: I was more thinking"> If this is possible, absolutely
14:34:08 <dEBRUYNE> Cake and Monerujo use the GUI lib basically
14:34:13 <sethsimmons> Ok, good to know
14:34:21 <ErCiccione[m]> trezor said to let them know the height and they will be good
14:35:24 <sethsimmons> I don't mean that we shouldn't try to do everything we can to get Ledger ready in time, but rather if that fails, do we delay the network upgrade until whenever they choose to/are ready to release?
14:35:37 <sarang> Trezor will have a small PR to the Monero codebase when we merge the CLSAG code and decide the height, I am told
14:35:44 <sarang> But they made it sound like they are otherwise good to go
14:36:26 <sarang> and apparently they've already been doing testing with their own test suite
14:36:57 <ErCiccione[m]> At the end if they don't care of moving Monero up on their priorities, people will just go to the competing company that will do it, as it should be. We can give ledger as much support as they need, but adapting to the needs of a company which makes money on Monero is absurd.
14:36:59 <hyc> sethsimmons: I just mean, here we are in July, and they're telling us October.
14:37:08 <ErCiccione[m]> should be their priority not ours
14:37:16 <hyc> if they miss their promised October date, *then* we rake them over the coals
14:37:24 <hyc> but for now, they've given us advance warning. what's the problem?
14:37:27 <sethsimmons> Thats what I'm saying
14:37:27 <sarang> I am asking the following things of the Ledger team now (the head of the coin integration team is now looped in on the emails)...
14:37:48 <sethsimmons> Not to move UP the date, but to keep the date we set yesterday, try to help them how we can, and be clear about the lack of support if they aren't ready
14:37:51 <sarang> 1. Will any additional changes to the Monero codebase be needed (aside from https://github.com/SarangNoether/monero/commit/91e77cea58f43b364e793b07476cd486078deba0) for Ledger support?
14:38:26 <sarang> 2. Is the new Monero app for Ledger (that includes WIP CLSAG support) available? If nobody else at Ledger can/will be able to work on it, perhaps someone else will if it's made available.
14:39:34 <sarang> What is the earliest possible schedule (code freeze, binary release, upgrade) that could guarantee Ledger support? There seems to be a fair amount of developer frustration that Ledger support could be unavailable given the currently-proposed timeline, especially given all the earlier work that had been done on CLSAG Ledger integration.
14:39:38 <sarang> ^ that's question 3
14:39:43 <sarang> [end questions]
14:39:51 <sethsimmons> Thats great
14:41:07 <sarang> Seem reasonable? I'm trying to communicate the frustration in a constructive way, and offer possible solutions
14:41:22 <hyc> looks good
14:41:42 <sarang> Hopefully having the team lead in the loop will help to get more specific answers about timing
14:43:58 <sarang> After this is all done, I'll make a much better effort to understand the hardware wallet development cycle
14:44:07 <sarang> and avoid these kinds of scheduling problems in the future
14:44:41 <hyc> sounds like the prblems happen on their side
14:46:36 <sarang> If there were another developer who could work on the application, that might solve it
14:46:45 <ErCiccione[m]> The problem is only on their side. I don't understand why we should bend to the needs of a company who cannot make a schedule to accomodate the needs of their customers
14:46:51 <sarang> This may be primarily a case of bad timing, where the sole developer is unavailable
14:47:08 <sarang> I don't want to throw anyone under the bus here
14:47:28 <sarang> I'm operating on my clearly incomplete understanding of their broader development cycle
14:48:11 <ErCiccione[m]> I feel like we are trying to solve somebody elses problems
14:49:16 <sarang> It sounds like with a slightly different schedule, there may not be an issue
14:49:21 <sarang> I'll wait to hear back on that
14:50:28 <dEBRUYNE> sarang: As far as I know, there are multiple people that have sufficient capabilities to work on XMR
14:50:50 <sarang> Within the Ledger team?
14:50:52 <sarang> Or more broadly
14:51:06 <sarang> If their working branch is made available, maybe someone else can finish it up
14:53:42 <dEBRUYNE> Yes
14:54:15 <dEBRUYNE> At least cslashm and the person that took over
14:55:44 <sarang> The person who took over is the person unavailable
14:55:59 <sarang> And cslashm handed over responsibility already
14:58:16 <ErCiccione[m]> My solution: 1) Announce the date and warn people that ledger might not be ready for the hard fork 2) wait for ledger's customer to complain 3) Ledger realize its paying customers are pissed if they cannot use tehir hw 4) ledger gets its shit together. Profit
14:58:48 <sarang> Perhaps wait until I hear back from the team lead
14:59:01 <sarang> If only a small schedule change would be needed, that'd be great
14:59:11 <sarang> Not ideal, but great for users
15:01:07 <dEBRUYNE> ErCiccione[m]: That sounds like a mutually destructive course of action
15:01:11 <ErCiccione[m]> I think it's a bad idea. We already set a date keeping in consideration their internal problems (because that's what it is). It's simply a wrong approach IMO.
15:01:12 <dEBRUYNE> It will only sour the relation with Ledger
15:01:26 <dEBRUYNE> sarang: Yes, but afaik he still works at ledger
15:01:34 <dEBRUYNE> I don't see why he cannot jump in
15:01:38 <dEBRUYNE> This is basically an 'emergency' case
15:01:39 <sarang> Part of setting a date was to see if it would be reasonable for those teams, no?
15:01:41 <ErCiccione[m]> What are you referring to?
15:01:59 <dEBRUYNE> The strategy you outlined
15:02:13 <dEBRUYNE> It will merely result in pissed off users, a pissed off Ledger team, and a soured relationship between Monero and Ledger
15:02:36 <ErCiccione[m]> oh, that wasn't really serious :)
15:04:01 <ErCiccione[m]> but i stand by my point that adapting too much to the needs of a company that makes money on Monero is wrong. Should be the other way round and also sets a bad precedent. Support as much as they need. Moving our schedule, no.
15:04:21 <sarang> Well, the schedule was pretty arbitrary
15:04:44 <sarang> Sticking with it simply on some kind of principle, if it harms users, seems unwise
15:05:06 <sarang> At least having a candidate schedule has moved the discussion forward with Ledger
15:05:15 <sarang> and there's some benefit to that
15:06:01 <ErCiccione[m]> No. We are telling them that they do whatever they want, because we will adapt to "not harm users"
15:06:42 <sarang> I see your argument, but I would at least like to wait and hear from the team lead
15:06:54 <sarang> Perhaps the response will be "ok, we can make that work after all"
15:06:58 <sarang> Perhaps not
15:07:50 <ErCiccione[m]> I still think it's a wrong approach, but sure we can wait for their reply. The release date is set in the meantime.
15:09:31 <sethsimmons> I think sarang has a good middle ground.
15:09:48 <sethsimmons> We've set a date that we will do our best to stick to, and use to leverage Ledger to try and meet our generous timelines
15:09:57 <sethsimmons> If they respond that they can't do it until some very late date, we have another discussion on what to do then
15:10:06 <sethsimmons> But in the meantime we certainly owe them the chance to respond etc.
15:10:51 <sethsimmons> The ideal is that they realize we mean business and they have no good reason to hold up our network upgrade, and they figure out how to not have an entire coin support rely on a single person and meet our dates
15:11:11 <sethsimmons> If that doesn't happen we can move from there with more clarity.
15:11:25 <ErCiccione[m]> I'll shut up after this, but we don't owe them anything. It's totally the other way round. Let's keep that in mind.
15:11:47 <sethsimmons> We owe them common decency to communicate
15:12:01 <sethsimmons> I don't think we owe them delaying the deployment because they have a single point of failure
15:12:03 <sarang> OK, I reached out to cslashm again as well
15:12:16 <sethsimmons> Thanks sarang
15:12:25 <sethsimmons> For spearheading the comms around this
15:13:22 <sarang> No problem; I want to make sure it's all handled in a civil way
15:13:29 <ErCiccione[m]> sethsimmons: Sure, of course and since we care, we gave a generous timeline, we offerd support and we are even trying to fix their problems. I think that's where we should stop.
15:13:53 <sethsimmons> I agree with you
15:14:00 <sethsimmons> Just hoping it doesn't come to moving forward without support
15:14:05 <sarang> So the status is that I've asked those questions of Francois (who now does the Monero development for Ledger) and the integration team lead, and also just looped in Cedric (who says he is quite busy but may be able to jump in with select tasks)
15:14:07 <sethsimmons> So let'
15:14:42 <sethsimmons> Is Cedric = cslashm?
15:14:45 <dEBRUYNE> Yes
15:14:46 <sethsimmons> Assuming so
15:14:53 <sethsimmons> thanks
15:16:36 <sarang> yes
15:16:56 <sarang> OK, he's contacting Francois as well to get more clarity on this
19:12:11 <selsta> kinda missed the discussions in the last days but we can’t announce a hard fork without Ledger support, though that seems to be consensus anyway
19:14:06 <rbrunner> Personally I see it as much more complicated. Seems to me there is much confusion and diverging opinions how to best react to this difficult situation.
19:15:13 <selsta> monero includes ledger source code so if Ledger updates later we have to release again anyway
19:15:20 <selsta> and I’m not interested in doing 2 releases :P
19:16:33 <rbrunner> Well, there wasn't exactly a dearth of point releases. That could well go into one of this, in a worst-case scenario that is. Hardfork would be only once of course.
19:19:21 <rbrunner> I see the whole story as growing pains, which will only increase with success, with bigger "ecosystem", more players, more interdependencies. It's hard to stay capable of acting.
19:20:40 <rbrunner> Nobody plans to make life hard for anybody else, but how to decide if push comes to shove. Very difficult questions.
19:25:15 <moneromooo> There are people who do.
19:27:23 <sech1> Knowing how software dev works in reasonably big companies... If if fork date is moved to November then December etc. someone will always ask for more time
19:27:30 <sech1> *Even if
19:27:54 <sech1> Just set a deadline for everyone once, and then help whoever asks for help
19:28:23 <rbrunner> 3 months out, not to forget
19:38:48 <sarang> There is already ledger CLSAG code in the Monero branch