I2P dev meeting, April 2, 2013 @ 21:00 UTC

Quick recap

  • Present:

    dg, dr|z3d, K1773R, KillYourTV, lillith, orion, RN, Shinobiwan, str4d, weltende

Jurnal IRC complet

20:52:42  <lillith> okay meeting topics for today:
20:54:22  <lillith> 1. Are bounties appropriate?
20:54:29  <lillith> 2. Managing money
20:54:29  <lillith> 2a. The ssl certs
20:54:32  <lillith> 3. Making the i2p project official
20:56:38  <lillith> 4. Procedure regarding decicions for the project (for example making it official)
20:56:53  <lillith> for scrollback from last week if you were not here, http://sighup.i2p/irclogs/show?search=&user=&from_date=26+Mar+2013&to_date=26+Mar+2013&channels[]=#i2p-dev&per_page=3&page_format=Html
20:56:53  <lillith> relevant zzz.i2p posts: http://zzz.i2p/topics/1359 for the meeting thread
20:56:53  <lillith> http://zzz.i2p/topics/1366 for the bounties thread
20:57:07  <iRelay> Title: zzz.i2p: Managing the project (at zzz.i2p)
20:57:09  <iRelay> Title: zzz.i2p: I2P Bounty System - 2013 (at zzz.i2p)
20:57:55  <trolly> chosen download bin file from zzz.i2p?
20:58:02  <lillith> 1. Are bounties appropriate, and further bounty discussion
20:58:05  <dg> Huh. Corruption again!
20:58:50  <lillith> not sure who (if anyone) woud like to be pinged, so i'l go on
20:59:22  <dg> trolly: that's a bug
20:59:30  <trolly> haha, no problem
20:59:41  <lillith> Last week it was decided that while bounties can be a good thing they may well need some looking at
20:59:48  <trolly> a trojan bug?  just joking..
20:59:59  <dg> try to nab the output of `http_proxy="" http://zzz.i2p/whateverurlbrokebefore` and check /logs for anything important
21:00:05  <dg> it seems to be corruption, we saw this on id3nt.i2p in the past
21:00:19  <lillith> i suggested some revisions of the 50 BTC syndie bounty to echelon, and he has updated it
21:01:06  <lillith> which led me to two questions: can/should we employ people, ie give them a small amount of money regularly over an extended period?
21:01:57  <lillith> and what exactly is the procedure on bounties funded by i2p's money, not directly from a donor
21:02:20  * lillith opens up the floor for discussion
21:04:50  <str4d_> dg: if it's occuring on another site, that suggests an I2P tunnel problem.
21:05:26  <dg> str4d_: This happened before, is what I am saying. I do not know if the person affected == trolly but it was a few months back and none of us had any answer.
21:05:41  * str4d_ was affected by it.
21:05:52  <dr|z3d> dg: !!!
21:05:56  <dg> Okay, more than one person.
21:06:10  <dg> I believe zab was still around at the time which may tell you the period..
21:06:21  <dg> dr|z3d: !!!
21:06:24  <str4d_> But the issue is orthogonal to the current discussion =)
21:06:36  * dr|z3d lols.
21:06:47  <lillith> str4d_: implying discussion ;)
21:08:32  <Shinobiwan> should i2p employ people?  yes and no IMO.    yes the people that continue to provide services that make i2p of higher quality (such as running the default IRC network and the more popular things like id3nt.i2p)  are the best candidates to receive funds... in addition to the developer stuff which may have bounties attached.
21:09:27  <str4d_> Shinobiwan: I wouldn't consider that employment though.
21:09:50  <str4d_> "Employment" would be payments for the purpose of direct I2P development (code or otherwise).
21:10:19  <dr|z3d> Shinobiwan: i2p should award effort and achievement.
21:10:43  <lillith> what i had initially proposed was a small monthly payment for maintaining syndie, getting and keeping it into repos, bug fizing, etc
21:12:25  <dr|z3d> otoh, i2p should not award aspiration, lazinesss or failure to deliver.
21:12:32  <str4d_> That seems like a good compromise between the current bounty system and "proper" employment (which is hard for anonymous dev work)
21:13:20  <str4d_> Right. So if a monthly system were set up, the payment would be subject to "sufficient" work having been done.
21:13:31  <lillith> dr|z3d: absolutely. there is plenty of money to give to people who deserve it
21:14:06  <str4d_> (So it would require a monthly meeting between the deciding people to analyze the various outputs during that period)
21:14:09  <dr|z3d> lillith: we're swimming in it.
21:14:35  <str4d_> I don't think that failure to deliver in one particular month should be cause for complete funding cuts, though.
21:15:03  <dr|z3d> commitment, dedication, service.
21:15:04  <lillith> people have afk commitments as well as internet ones
21:15:07  <Shinobiwan> derp, pingout.
21:15:37  <dr|z3d> remind me again why str4d_ isn't getting compensated? :)
21:16:07  <str4d_> I'd propose a more flexible system where the "employee" gets paid for the months they do sufficient work in.
21:16:07  <str4d_> (extended absences would be grounds for discontinuing funding though)
21:16:22  <str4d_> lillith: exactly (like zzz currently)
21:17:02  <str4d_> dr|z3d: under my proposed system, I wouldn't be at present =P
21:17:26  <dr|z3d> the threat of halebopp dropping indent inspires zzz to offer hosting costs. so why does str4d_ have to battle with eche|on to get hosting funding?
21:17:53  <dr|z3d> i offer one word: incompetence.
21:17:56  <str4d_> dr|z3d: that's on a tangent.
21:18:42  <dr|z3d> str4d_: more than likely.
21:18:45  <darrob> what kind of maintenance work are we talking about here? shouldn't bugs and specific goals like repo inclusion be separate bounties so more than one person can claim them?
21:18:56  <str4d_> There are two kinds of potential funding that I can see - the bounty/employment hybrid above, and donations from I2P towards community services. These should be treated separately.
21:19:25  <dr|z3d> value added recompense.
21:20:00  <dr|z3d> anything else is jizz. like paying 10btc for dogpoo.
21:20:03  <lillith> str4d_: and competitions too, if there were ever to be another
21:20:10  <str4d_> darrob: what we are trying to do is promote developers staying around.
21:20:13  <str4d_> lillith: true, that's a third category.
21:20:40  <dr|z3d> also beer. my bad.
21:21:34  <RN> I wouldn't mind being paid beer for my humor...   ;)
21:21:43  <lillith> from echelon.i2p: - the I2P general fund will cover all needed costs of I2P - discussed by dev team and will be noted here and on official webpage
21:22:09  <lillith> i think most things would be acceptable as long as they are discussed and agreed upon beforehand
21:22:12  <str4d_> darrob: So rather than paying out a large lump sum for an arbitrary milestone and then the dev goes AWOL, we define smaller milestones and tasks within the confines of (what is currently called) the bounty, and the dev gets continual smaller payments.
21:23:55  <str4d_> The bounty system would still exist for bounties proposed by third parties (as they have control over how their funds are used), but for bounties that would be proposed by I2P itself from I2P funds, the new system should be better for I2P IMHO.
21:24:26  <dr|z3d> bounties are shit. hit and run contributors.
21:25:09  <lillith> dr|z3d: hence why we are discussing a new system
21:25:12  <dr|z3d> not to mention "i paid $200, I'm important attitudes"
21:25:26  <str4d_> Part of the problem IMHO is that the current system only has a general description, with no concrete structure.
21:25:49  <dr|z3d> lillith: excuse me if i'm not quite following the finer points of the argument :)
21:25:52  <str4d_> For the new system, we need an agreed set of guidelines for proposing and managing funded tasks.
21:26:59  <lillith> dr|z3d: if people want to waste/spend their money on bounties for improperly completed features, they should still be allowed to imho
21:27:58  <str4d_> lillith: yep. Or they can choose to use the new system, by donating their money to I2P and putting in a request through whatever process we decide on to set up a new funded task.
21:28:16  <lillith> i agree - there is money there, and we might as well use it, so we might as well use it properly and effectively
21:28:56  <lillith> and then if the donor goes awol it's still technically a community owned bounty
21:28:59  <darrob> i'd like to see people sticking around too, of course, but i don't see how bounties are shit at all. on the other hand the monthly thing sounds like trouble but i don't mean to dismiss it too quickly.
21:29:02  <str4d_> Tasks funded via the new system need to be funded with money controlled by I2P, because it will be a panel of I2P representatives who decide what counts as "sufficient" work, not the donor themselves.
21:29:03  <dr|z3d> lillith: i disagree. donate to the project and let the project decide how to distribute rewards.
21:29:06  * Shinobiwan not sure if my other msgs went through
21:29:17  <Shinobiwan> <Shinobiwan> bounty and employment != donation ... both should take place I think...   employment/bounty for dev specific stuff...    and perhaps donations for things like community services
21:29:19  <Shinobiwan> <Shinobiwan> the employment part would need more of a specific set of conditions
21:29:24  <Shinobiwan> <Shinobiwan> the community service part, really just needs the community to decide what's worth supporting
21:29:27  <Shinobiwan> <Shinobiwan> and then dish out something appropriate
21:29:50  <str4d_> dr|z3d: both options will be there.
21:29:53  <K1773R> Shinobiwan: they didnt, now they did :)
21:30:04  <str4d_> Shinobiwan: http://killyourtv.i2p/irclogs/latest.log.html for scrollback.
21:30:07  <iRelay> Title: #i2p-dev logs for Tuesday, 2013-04-02 (at killyourtv.i2p)
21:30:12  <dr|z3d> "oh we need russian" no we don't. we need commitment. not money chasing rats that disappear as soon as the bounty is awarded.
21:30:24  <Shinobiwan> thx str4d, K1773R
21:30:47  <lillith> dr|z3d: a new, private infrastructure may well appear for paying individuals for work - it might as well all be in together
21:31:27  <str4d_> darrob: the reason most proposals sound like trouble is because we don't have a large enough developer base to properly run/support them. Therefore, a proposal that should result in a larger developer base is a good idea.
21:31:42  <dr|z3d> money should not be able to dictate the project. period.
21:32:01  <KillYourTV> and http://killyourtv.i2p/irclogs/%23i2p-dev.2013-04-02.log   for "live" scrollback (the HTMLized logs are processed every 10 minutes or so)
21:32:16  <dr|z3d> sponsor the project, great, but don't tell us how to spend the money.
21:32:27  <darrob> dr|z3d: i like it if a money chasing rat fixed certain features in syndie and ran. what's the problem? maybe someday syndie will get a real developer again but that person won't necessarily need payment then. actually, as far as committed maintainers are concerned, it might actually be counterproductive to offer a pay for the job.
21:33:05  <Shinobiwan> thx KillYourTV
21:33:19  <KillYourTV> np
21:33:36  <dr|z3d> darrob: the "problem" is money thinking it can dictate the agenda.
21:33:39  <lillith> dr|z3d: i2p isn't being told how to spend its money, because bounty money never was i2p's. i2p/echelon just act as an escrow service
21:33:39  <str4d_> Interesting point dr|z3d - I think part of this depends on what we define as the I2P project.
21:34:42  <str4d_> lillith: I think the point dr|z3d is making is that, rather than being told how to spend its money, I2P is being told how to proceed, i.e. the development path is decided by the person with the most money.
21:34:57  <darrob> dr|z3d: bounties are just offers (or cries for help). where do you get the negative attitude?
21:35:21  <str4d_> And if the bounty process was adhered to as-is, that could potentially be rather problematic wrt the threat model.
21:36:18  <lillith> that is a good point - i hadn't thought of it in that way before
21:36:47  <Shinobiwan> a set of rules that says "This person must be paid on this date" is a good idea in that, that person can count on the income to be there when they need it.  But on the other hand, it also may create drama when people fail to meet other people's expectations of what that money is really going towards... so I think it's probably not inappropriate to have meeting specifically for 'paydays' or whatever... if there's going to be a 'regular' thing.
21:37:35  <dr|z3d> bounties are shit. show me ongoing commitment from bounty hunters and i'll change my view. except you can't. hit and run merchants.
21:37:49  <str4d_> So maybe what needs to happen is that any tasks/sub-projects that affect I2P directly must be funded and controlled by I2P itself.
21:37:52  <dr|z3d> darrob: i get the "negative" attitudes from half complete work that's awarded a bounty, only to disappear before you can say "um, i think you missed..."
21:38:03  <dr|z3d> darrob: also, next time you pretend str4d_ is a css artist, don't bother. you insult yourself.
21:38:10  <dr|z3d> and you also lose a friend.
21:38:13  <lillith> dr|z3d: didn't str4d_ and zzz claim some bounties for the unit tests?
21:38:17  <darrob> dr|z3d: what?
21:38:20  <str4d_> dr|z3d: OT
21:38:55  <dr|z3d> str4d_: yeah. also, beer. darrob: if you don't get it, *yawn*
21:39:03  <str4d_> lillith: that was after the unit tests bounty was split up into sub-tasks/milestones (which I'd say was a step towards the proposed new system).
21:39:45  <str4d_> dr|z3d: keep on-topic in here please =)
21:39:56  <lillith> I think everything has been said on this topic now no?
21:40:03  <Shinobiwan> if bounties exist IMO they should go towards the things that nobody currently part of the community knows how to or can do, IMO...  not the things they dont have time for.
21:40:06  * dr|z3d recalibrates.
21:40:06  <darrob> i guess all i'm trying to say is that i question that hit and run improvements are necessarily a bad thing.
21:40:19  <Shinobiwan> I2P will survive with everyone supporting it, not just the people who get paid
21:40:30  <str4d_> darrob: they are good for kickstarting development in a new area
21:40:37  <str4d_> But the I2P router/project is not a new area, IMHO
21:40:53  <str4d_> So, how about the following:
21:41:20  <dr|z3d> Shinobiwan: like design! *laughs* 5 years of asking for help, and not one iota of thought to offer a bounty *laughs*
21:41:58  <str4d_> Projects that directly affect the I2P program/network can be funded only from I2P funds, and donors who want to contribute just donate to I2P.
21:42:21  <dr|z3d> because designers aren't coders, ergo worth nothing. except when you're offering 10BTC/100$ for anything, including crayons.
21:42:47  <str4d_> Projects that don't directly affect the I2P program/network but are still I2P-related (e.g. syndie) are eligible for bounties on new/substantial work.
21:42:58  <dr|z3d> sorry, but I can't take this conversation _too_ seriously, built as it is on an anthill of incompetence.
21:43:01  <str4d_> (But can also be managed via I2P if the donor wants)
21:43:23  <lillith> dr|z3d: i'l ping you when we move on then :)
21:43:26  <str4d_> But a bounty would need to be more accurately-defined than the current system allows.
21:43:46  <dr|z3d> lillith: very good, sir :)
21:44:04  <str4d_> s/allows/does
21:44:10  <darrob> str4d_: does that imply that there will be an i2p management board to make those decisions? i think that was another week's discussion, right?
21:44:32  <str4d_> darrob: yes.
21:44:42  <str4d_> This is separate to any "official-ness".
21:45:05  <lillith> str4d_: sounds good :)
21:45:32  <str4d_> But there would be a panel of (elected) developers (coders/designers/contributors) who are trusted with steering the I2P project.
21:45:46  <str4d_> I.e. something a bit more formal than what we currently have.
21:46:00  <lillith> darrob: that's either coming up or later, depending on whether we want to continue
21:46:26  <str4d_> Mmm. My proposal works under the assumption that such a panel exists in some form.
21:47:05  <str4d_> (exact specifics being discussed later as above)
21:47:21  <Shinobiwan> lulz
21:47:28  <Shinobiwan> what's #i2p-dev then?
21:47:35  <lillith> i disagree with the panel idea tbh
21:47:38  <lillith> meetings seem to work well, and they let new people have a say too
21:47:38  <lillith> it would need to be large enough to get a variety of perspectives
21:47:38  <lillith> you never know who might offer then next amazing idea
21:48:04  <str4d_> lillith: exactly.
21:48:11  <Shinobiwan> it's that panel, but yea... it would need to become officially official
21:48:18  <str4d_> But with the current size of the developer base, that's hard.
21:48:25  <str4d_> It's a chicken-and-egg problem.
21:48:35  <str4d_> And we need to break into the loop somewhere.
21:51:05  <lillith> Shinobiwan: yea, thats basically what i'm trying to say :)
21:51:05  <lillith> actually no it's not
21:51:05  <lillith> #i2p-dev along with mailing lists, zzz.i2p, syndie, etc
21:51:05  <lillith> anyone who wants a say should have a chance imho
21:52:35  <str4d_> lillith: yes, but there still needs to be a group of people with a final say.
21:52:53  <Shinobiwan> people need to know eachother w/out knowing one another... to the point I can say, str4d, KYTV, dr|z3d ... (a lot more but just for example) have been on the network for so long, and IMO all make I2P of higher quality.  Collectively I think people can figure out and reach an agreement who would go on such a panel... even though nobody really knows eachother AFK.   Opinions from new people to the project should be listened to also
21:52:53  <Shinobiwan> however
21:53:00  <str4d_> (i.e. the people who control the funds. Currently, that is a single person - eche)
21:53:25  <str4d_> At least to begin with.
21:53:52  <str4d_> The Debian developer model is a good one for making decisions like you suggest lillith - all done via voting.
21:53:55  <lillith> so, everyone has a say, a few (3 or 4) people have the final say?
21:54:10  <str4d_> (And a "developer" is just someone who has contributed in some way IIRC)
21:54:25  <str4d_> But a voting system needs a larger base of "developers" first, I think.
21:54:51  <str4d_> lillith: anyone can suggest an idea - that's never going to change.
21:55:06  <Shinobiwan> in my mind it's more than 3 or 4 people.. more like 12+ and growing...   but people that fail to make the meetings don't get to vote... (and if their vote is especially important/relevant, then the meeting might happen another time)
21:55:12  <str4d_> But I2P has finite resources, and those resources need to be allocated appropriately.
21:56:06  <str4d_> (the biggest resource being time from continual developers)
21:56:20  <KillYourTV> as I wrote on zzz.i2p, I think votes such as via gpg signed messages to a mailing list would be better than irc. We've got mailing lists and they should be utilized.
21:56:20  <str4d_> s/biggest/most important but currently most limited/
21:56:23  <iRelay> str4d_ meant: (the most important but currently most limited resource being time from continual developers)
21:56:28  <str4d_> KillYourTV: agreed.
21:56:43  <Shinobiwan> ya gpg signed == much better
21:56:54  <str4d_> Provides a transparent and verifiable archive of votes.
21:57:09  <lillith> is that topic 1 over then?
21:57:09  <darrob> i agree also. don't expect to accomplish any serious discussion on irc.
21:57:12  * KillYourTV is 'stealing' ideas from Debian's system(s)
21:57:19  <str4d_> http://www.debian.org/vote/
21:57:22  <iRelay> Title: Debian Voting Information (at www.debian.org)
21:57:39  <lillith> it's all open source, its there to be 'stolen' :)
21:58:06  <lillith> 2. Managing money
21:58:10  <KillYourTV> and with mailing lists you have the oh-so-helpful 'plonk' mechanism available if needed to raise the signal to noise ratio.
21:58:21  <lillith> eche|on: ping
21:58:24  <K1773R> KillYourTV: dont copy the "GPL Nazis" idea pls :P
21:59:46  <lillith> afaict the money management wrt bounties has already been discussed enough
22:00:12  <str4d_> KillYourTV: if we go the mailing-list route, the mailing-list needs to be usable entirely within I2P (currently not the case).
22:00:23  <str4d_> (But also usable externally)
22:00:33  <lillith> but there are other, non- bounty uses for money, for example purchasing ssl certificates
22:00:36  <KillYourTV> agreed
22:00:53  <darrob> str4d_: the nntp interface should qualify.
22:00:53  <KillYourTV> and agreed to lillith's last point (ofc)
22:01:04  <lillith> dr|z3d welt weltende welterde echelon
22:01:07  <darrob> ...which i *think* is functional.
22:01:10  <KillYourTV> are they linked?
22:01:30  <KillYourTV> I know they were supposed to be but the last I checked (months ago) they weren't.
22:01:38  <Shinobiwan> purchasing ssl certificates would go w/ donations IMO ... community services ... the same way to decide what the money goes towards as donations.
22:01:41  * KillYourTV fires up the nntp tunnel
22:01:41  <darrob> you can at least read through it.
22:01:44  <lillith> can we keep this ontopic guys, project management is coming up :)
22:02:01  <Shinobiwan> i.e.. have a meeting... say "we need this"... "agree?"  ...  panel says OK ... majority of panel green light
22:02:32  <Shinobiwan> not so quickly, but the general idea.
22:02:32  <Shinobiwan> hehe
22:02:47  <str4d_> Shinobiwan: can fall under the same vote system proposed above.
22:03:14  <Shinobiwan> yep
22:04:16  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> well the ML interface is accesible via i2p more or less.. http://vmfwbic2brek2ez223j6fc6bl5mmouzqvbsch45msvyyzih3iqua.b32.i2p/  still contains redirects to lists.i2p2.de.. not sure what to do about those
22:04:24  <iRelay> <iRelay@freenode> Title: lists.i2p2.de Mailing Lists (at vmfwbic2brek2ez223j6fc6bl5mmouzqvbsch45msvyyzih3iqua.b32.i2p)
22:04:32  <Shinobiwan> if there is such a panel, it is not finalized at a fixed number of people... IMO... it should grow, and grow and grow... so, whatever panel currently exists, should have some procedure to bring in new panel members regularly
22:04:43  <darrob> we need a central party with a politburo and the users' congress. :)
22:04:46  <KillYourTV> FTR, the mailing lists as currently set up are not available via nntp.
22:05:04  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> (haven't added it to the hosts.txt yet)
22:05:42  <KillYourTV> (at least not under i2p.*)
22:06:27  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> hmm.. they should be.. but maybe not under i2p.*
22:06:46  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> I didn't set it up.. so don't really know anymore ;)
22:06:58  <darrob> KillYourTV: i think i2p. are welt's preexisting groups. the new ones are alt.privacy.i2p.dev/general and alt.privacy.syndie.dev/general.
22:08:42  <KillYourTV> ah...nvm me. now that I refreshed the list again I see those new ones.
22:09:00  <KillYourTV> sorry
22:09:03  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> ah.. right.. slrn didn't show them as they didn't contain unread messages
22:09:34  <darrob> i'm still confused why there are no messages. i really thought i saw a couple of test messages before.
22:09:45  <lillith> can we get back on topic please?
22:10:23  <lillith> i, and surely others want to know what's going on with ssl certificates for the i2p domains
22:11:17  <KillYourTV> i didn't see the topic change, just     <lillith> but there are other, non- bounty uses for money, for example purchasing ssl certificates           /me zips it
22:11:56  <lillith> ahh, sorry
22:12:06  <lillith> <lillith> can we keep this ontopic guys, project management is coming up :)
22:12:23  <KillYourTV> and what's the topic? ;)   (I didn't see that switch)
22:12:30  <lillith> <lillith> 2. Managing money
22:12:41  <lillith> <lillith> afaict the money management wrt bounties has already been discussed enough
22:12:41  <str4d_> lillith: eche is currently sourcing the required money.
22:12:48  <lillith> <lillith> but there are other, non- bounty uses for money, for example purchasing ssl certificates
22:13:16  <str4d_> <kytv2> eche|on: any updates on the certificate situation? I haven't had to get "real "certs for a while and don't know how long the verification process takes nowadays.
22:13:19  <str4d_> <eche|on> kytv2: I am on the hunt for 3k euro and cert requests...
22:13:29  <lillith> so it's under control then?
22:13:36  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> and pushed..
22:14:14  <KillYourTV> yes, it's being taken care of
22:14:21  <orion> Can I reiterate my opinion that it's dangerous to have one person managing all the money?
22:14:45  <orion> ok
22:15:00  <dg> Current topic = ?
22:15:03  <orion> It's not being put in to some off-shore corporation, right?
22:15:14  <lillith> <lillith> 2. Managing money
22:15:21  <str4d_> orion: no.
22:15:58  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> afair eche wanted to speak with an lawyer about making i2p an official entity of some kind
22:15:58  <lillith> dr|z3d: ping :)
22:16:12  <str4d_> Currently our funds lie in a (bank?) account owned by eche|on and (mostly) in a Bitcoin wallet held by eche|on.
22:16:49  <KillYourTV> yes, that's right, in .at IIRC
22:17:07  <KillYourTV> (wrt: 'official entity')
22:18:46  <lillith> at as in austria?
22:18:53  <dg> yes
22:19:19  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> (not australia *scnr*)
22:19:46  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> (running gag from EEVblog if you are curious)
22:20:26  <lillith> okay, looks like we've moved on again
22:20:41  <lillith> 3. Making the project official
22:21:12  <str4d_> lillith: re: money management, it's rather dependent on both the "official" status of the project, and the project management status.
22:21:30  <str4d_> (The former re: where funds are kept, the latter re: how funds are spent)
22:22:14  <lillith> ok, fair enough :) we can straddle points 2 and 3 for a while then :)
22:25:16  <trolly> must go
22:25:19  <trolly> bye
22:25:47  <trolly> later I'll send yo new translaion str4d_
22:29:26  <lillith> or not, as the case may be
22:30:11  <lillith> i'd suggest time to move on :)
22:30:28  <iRelay> <jenkins@kytv> Starting build #28 for job I2P-Bote
22:30:28  <lillith> 4. Procedure for making decisions in i2p
22:31:27  * KillYourTV votes for taking long discussions about important decisions to a mailing list
22:31:30  <iRelay> <jenkins@kytv> Project I2P-Bote build #28:SUCCESS in 1 min 3 sec: http://jenkins.killyourtv.i2p/job/I2P-Bote/28/
22:31:34  <lillith> so, mailing list, hierachy, etc
22:31:37  <KillYourTV> That way anyone can take part when he/she can
22:31:50  <lillith> i'd like to put in an honourable mention for syndie here
22:31:56  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> +1
22:32:03  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> (@ML)
22:32:04  <lillith> everything is signed by default, for a start
22:33:18  <KillYourTV> I like syndie too (ofc), but mailing lists would be easier for outsiders to take part
22:33:45  <lillith> but yes, i agree in principle. no point hanging around waiting for discussion that clearly isn't happening
22:33:48  <KillYourTV> that's not to say that discussions can't be mirrored to syndie...
22:34:33  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> yeah.. nntp syndie gateway or so would be nice to have
22:34:36  <lillith> and of course, officially moving is only one thread away ;)
22:35:54  <KillYourTV> 21:00 UTC isn't handy for everyone. On a mailing list time zones mean nothing. On a mailing list there no netsplits, relay problems, or ping outs. For meaningful discussions a mailing list (IMHO) is _THE_ way to go.
22:36:30  <dg> KillYourTV: I agree.
22:37:54  <KillYourTV> irc is good when you need pretty-damn-close-to-realtime...but "we need a new domain" doesn't have that kind of urgency. Post it and it'll be addressed when $user can address it.
22:37:54  <lillith> imho syndie has all the benefits of mailing lists and more, the only issue is accessability for outsiders
22:38:32  <lillith> then again, how many people that we want to include already use mailing lists?
22:39:03  <KillYourTV> There's been talk of a Syndie webapp" but I don't think that's gone (and will) go anywhere.
22:40:20  <KillYourTV> I'd gather that more use mailing lists than IRC.
22:40:31  <lillith> i don't want to dominate a discussion on syndie vs ml here, but i think it's something woth considering
22:41:25  <iRelay> * weltende@freenode prefers his mail/nntp client tbh
22:42:04  <KillYourTV> syndie via mutt  would = 'win'
22:43:14  <lillith> this topic also includes hierachy, which was touched upon before but imo needs some expansion
22:45:09  <dg> I don't know if we can come to a consensus on anything AND have a discussion easily with IRC meetings anymore.
22:45:28  <dg> It worked in 2006 when it was more of a quick update on the project but it's not anymore and it involves lengthy debates/discussion.
22:46:40  <lillith> having more time to think through things would result in on topic, well thought out, clear discussion
22:46:47  <lillith> threading also = win
22:47:13  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> +1
22:47:21  <KillYourTV> +1
22:47:28  <dg> +1
22:47:39  <dg> might I add: nntp, fuck yeah.
22:47:50  <lillith> irc meetings were always an experimental thing, and the experiment failed :)
22:48:05  <dg> hey, lillith, at least we're having the discussions now, right? :)
22:49:40  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> imho we should keep irc meetings and move things that take a long time in the meeting or which has a lot of discussion to the ML
22:50:11  <lillith> yep :) seems like no-one actually likes meetings anyway haha
22:50:15  <dg> I think it's mainly due to the timing.
22:50:18  <dg> And pressure to respond in a fast manner..
22:50:18  <dg> postman: http://zzz.i2p/topics/1367
22:50:18  <lillith> but there's no chance of getting a time thats good for _everyone_
22:50:18  <lillith> plus some people have irregular schedules
22:50:18  <dg> Exactly.
22:50:25  <iRelay> Title: zzz.i2p: I2P and e-mail (at zzz.i2p)
22:50:30  <lillith> with a heavy heart, and feeling rather poetic, i'd gladly baf the last meeting ;)
22:50:41  <dg> weltende: I was thinking this.. keep irc meetings for discussion of some things in the ML (actually doing something & such). W
22:50:44  <dg> go for it, lillith.
22:51:26  * lillith bafs the meeting closed
22:51:36  <lillith> thank you, and goodnight :)
22:52:01  <iRelay> <jenkins@kytv> Starting build #103 for job I2P
22:52:09  <lillith> can susimail handle mailing lists?
22:52:41  <KillYourTV> sure, but I'd use a 'real' client like claws or mutt
22:53:04  <KillYourTV> (just a matter or preference)
22:54:55  <lillith> ahh, thats okay then :)
22:56:33  <iRelay> <jenkins@kytv> Project I2P build #103:SUCCESS in 4 min 34 sec: http://jenkins.killyourtv.i2p/job/i2p/103/
23:01:15  <iRelay> <jenkins@kytv> Project I2P UnitTests build #74:SUCCESS in 4 min 31 sec: http://jenkins.killyourtv.i2p/job/UnitTests/74/
23:04:51  <KillYourTV> and +1 to meetings continuing with the bigger things being taken to mailing lists/forums/syndie.
23:05:54  <KillYourTV> IRC is good for quick status updates..but a "newsletter" of sorts could work for that purpose too.
23:06:19  <lillith> it's nice to have a start, with some goals, and an end, with a consensus
23:06:22  <dg> mailing list also works for alerts. see how tor do it with consensus issues.
23:06:46  <lillith> 'today THIS is what we decided and THIS is what we're going to do about it'
23:07:29  <lillith> i'm not sure but i imagine ml discussions as dragging on with no distinct endpoint
23:07:52  <lillith> +1 for newsletter though
23:08:33  <KillYourTV> they can, sure...but I think more will be accomplished on a long ML discussion than a 4-5 hour long irc meeting.
23:09:08  * lillith signs up with an open mind :)
23:09:38  * psi likes the idea of a mailing list
23:09:53  <K1773R> where is the ML?
23:10:01  * KillYourTV really likes MLs but they (the ones on the Internet) will probably cause his AFK identity to be leaked...heh
23:10:12  <KillYourTV> lists.i2p2.de i think
23:10:39  <KillYourTV> and (/me scrolls up)
23:10:54  <KillYourTV> http://vmfwbic2brek2ez223j6fc6bl5mmouzqvbsch45msvyyzih3iqua.b32.i2p/
23:11:08  <iRelay> Title: lists.i2p2.de Mailing Lists (at vmfwbic2brek2ez223j6fc6bl5mmouzqvbsch45msvyyzih3iqua.b32.i2p)
23:11:24  <dg> it just redirects
23:11:55  <KillYourTV> there's also nntp.welterde.i2p
23:12:37  <KillYourTV> alt.privacy.i2p.*, alt.privacy.syndie.*
23:13:16  <KillYourTV> (cheers darrob for pointing me to the right usenet groups)
23:14:57  * RN wanders off to tinker with thundirbird
23:17:46  <str4d_> +1 to meetings continuing (but sticking to time) and +1 to "important" discussions on the ML.
23:19:32  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> for you interested.. posting is atm allowed for the following groups:
23:19:35  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> post: "i2p.*,alt.anonymous,alt.anonymous.*,alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.privacy.anon-server.*,alt.privacy.i2p.*,alt.privacy.syndie.*"
23:25:35  <KillYourTV> this will have to be fixed before "important" discussions make their way there   http://lists.i2p2.de/pipermail/i2p-general/
23:25:42  <iRelay> Title: The I2p-general Archives (at lists.i2p2.de)
23:26:27  <KillYourTV> ...unless the messages were purposely wiped (which wouldn't make sense)
23:30:13  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> hmm..
23:30:21  <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> no idea atm.. but heading to bed now