kytv/I2P_Website
1
0
Fork 0
forked from I2P_Developers/i2p.www
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

meetings 242-244

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
zzz
2016-03-05 14:12:05 +00:00
parent c8a0cc43b7
commit 4f720fbc50
6 changed files with 984 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

407
i2p2www/meetings/logs/242.log Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,407 @@
20:00:00 <zzz> Agenda http://zzz.i2p/topics/2014
20:00:00 <zzz> 0) Hi
20:00:00 <zzz> 1) Review of assigned tasks from Dec. 30 meeting - http://zzz.i2p/topics/2016 (zzz)
20:00:00 <zzz> 2) Other CCC followup - http://zzz.i2p/topics/2019 (zzz)
20:00:00 <zzz> 3) Project meeting plan for 2016 (zzz, Sadie)
20:00:00 <zzz> 4) GMP 6 readiness for merging - http://zzz.i2p/topics/1960 (tuna)
20:00:00 <zzz> 5) http://secure.tinhat.i2p console home page request - http://zzz.i2p/topics/236?page=3#p10884 (david)
20:00:00 <zzz> 6) Proposal for Code of Conduct - http://zzz.i2p/topics/2015 (Sadie)
20:00:02 <lazygravy> There is a link to it in the ccc blog post
20:00:05 <zzz> 0) Hi
20:00:09 <zzz> hi
20:00:19 <EinMByte> hi
20:00:21 <psi> hi
20:00:25 <lazygravy> Hello
20:00:32 <cacapo> hi
20:00:33 <sadie_i21> hi
20:00:37 <zzz> 1) Review of assigned tasks from Dec. 30 meeting - http://zzz.i2p/topics/2016 (zzz)
20:00:44 <Irc2PGuest76545> Hey
20:00:48 <zzz> ok, let's quickly go through the open items only
20:00:49 <anonimal> Hi
20:00:50 <Hummingbird> hi
20:00:55 <z3r0fox> Hi
20:01:03 <zzz> gravy to post one on encrypted leasesets by Jan. 27
20:01:11 <zzz> lazygravy, what's the status?
20:01:34 <orignal> hi
20:01:37 <lazygravy> zzz: very late on that. But it is "started". I still plan on writing it
20:01:38 <zab__> hi
20:01:44 <trolly> hi
20:01:50 <lazygravy> Might change the topic , but my point stands
20:01:51 <zzz> lazygravy, what's the new target date?
20:02:27 <Irc2PGuest39432> oops
20:02:28 <Irc2PGuest39432> hi
20:02:37 <lazygravy> zzz: president's day weekend?
20:02:52 <zzz> got a date for that?
20:03:10 <lazygravy> 15 Feb
20:03:14 <zzz> ok thanks
20:03:17 <zzz> Sadie to work with J to get his blog post up
20:03:32 <zzz> sadie_i21,status?
20:03:42 <sadie_i21> mid feb
20:03:55 <supervillain> vodka anyone?
20:04:02 <zzz> Sadie to contact backup to discuss reseed campaign
20:04:05 <zzz> sadie_i21,status?
20:04:12 <Irc2PGuest76545> hi
20:04:27 <sadie_i21> not yet
20:04:39 <zzz> new due date please?
20:06:09 <zzz> ok, we'll move on, sadie please let me know
20:06:10 <sadie_i21> mid feb for this too
20:06:10 <Irc2PGuest95462> hi
20:06:13 <zzz> Strengthinging the network - home page and additional pages
20:06:13 <zzz> ** str4d, gravy, cacapo: Add use cases, what are we best at, more "passion" and "fat", add / highlight Bote, by end of January
20:06:17 <zzz> ok thx sadie
20:06:31 <zzz> str4d, lazygravy, cacapo, status?
20:07:08 <cacapo> we're working on it but need feedback from community i think
20:07:16 <str4d> hi
20:07:16 <lazygravy> cacapo++
20:07:22 <Irc2PGuest76545> hallo
20:07:40 <zzz> new due date please?
20:08:42 <cacapo> also I don't think we're clear on the end purpose. Is it for a blog post?
20:08:50 <hottuna> cacapo: if you need me to read through it again, please ping me
20:08:50 <cacapo> march 1st
20:09:07 <EinMByte> please also try to target researchers, not just end-users
20:09:07 <str4d> The scope AFAICT is to alter the homepage and the "supported applications" page, no?
20:09:18 <zzz> iirc the intention was to enhance the home page and possibly add additional pages. Not a blog post
20:09:33 <zzz> sadie_i21, could you elaborate please?
20:09:34 <EinMByte> Ok, nvm in that case
20:09:38 <str4d> Right
20:09:47 <cacapo> so it's the supo
20:09:59 <cacapo> supported applications page then?
20:10:26 <zzz> iirc the priority was the home page. If it spilled over to other pages (new or not), that's ok too
20:10:55 <cacapo> also: do we talk about torrents for PR?
20:11:06 <zzz> unless sadie has something to add, let's move on
20:11:22 <zzz> we can discuss torrents or not outside the meeting
20:11:37 <sadie_i21> nope
20:11:38 <str4d> sadie_i21, the Simply Secure design thoughts are probably relevant here too.
20:11:39 <str4d> If they have any immediate thoughts regarding the homepage, that will affect how the use cases stuff is written up and presented/
20:12:00 <zzz> comraden to edit / polish / enhance / post the "i2p story" by end of February
20:12:06 <sadie_i21> sorry zzz, on a call...
20:12:09 <zzz> comraden1, you on track for that?
20:12:13 <str4d> cacapo, I say yes, highlighting benefits of torrents (e.g. downloading new versions of Tails!)
20:12:17 <psi> sadie_i21: do you have the press@geti2p.net spam firehose forwarding at your email yet?
20:12:42 <zzz> psi, please take that offline with sadie
20:12:45 <sadie_i21> no, not yet
20:12:50 <psi> kk
20:13:09 <zzz> ok, we will assume comraden1 is on track
20:13:17 <zzz> broader roadmap and priority setting processes are TBD, but should come out of the evolving project meetings
20:13:26 <comraden1> zzz: haven't read the post you put up yet, as I mentioned to you earlier I had an emergency I had to attend to
20:13:50 <zzz> that item is mine and sadie's, let's defer that to item 3)
20:13:52 <comraden1> I will be looking at the history sometime this week and will reach back out with corrections to you & lance
20:14:05 <zzz> comraden1, are you on track for end february?
20:14:26 <str4d> zzz, the draft is certainly interesting :)
20:14:31 <str4d> cacapo, regarding how it appears on the website, I think it would work well having it interspersed with year headers (breaking it into "chapters" as it were). Also would mean we could navigate through it by year.
20:14:34 <comraden1> zzz: so far, yes :)
20:14:45 <zzz> sadie to review, make recommendations or possibly start managing tickets (by when?)
20:14:55 <zzz> sadie_i21, status? due date?
20:15:55 <zzz> ok we'll assume she's still on a call, please get back to us
20:16:05 <zzz> 4) Android -
20:16:05 <zzz> kinda like 1) in that it's code and tied to the java router, but like 3) in that it's ad hoc or a one-man show by str4d, and he's behind.
20:16:13 <str4d> DM from @YrB1rd: "There. Are. So. Many."
20:16:24 <str4d> (a few days ago, but you get the idea ;P)
20:16:57 <zzz> this wasn't really a todo item, but str4d you have any proposal on how to manage android development, or can we give you and/or sadie a more specific assignment on this?
20:17:09 <str4d> Yah, basically everything that had me as a primary dependency was completely shot for the last 4-5 months.
20:17:36 <zzz> can you give us a target for a 0.9.24 release, and perhaps another target to come up with a plan on how to manage android better?
20:17:39 <str4d> Because I've been writing my PhD thesis.
20:18:08 <str4d> Targeting submission at the end of this week, so that will be out of the way, but I will also be taking on paid work after then.
20:18:23 <zzz> feb. 5, great
20:18:33 <str4d> 0.9.24: going to aim for this weekend.
20:18:38 <sadie_i21> zzz - can we circle back to ticket question - I am only half here rn
20:18:56 <zzz> circle back now or circle back later?
20:19:16 <sadie_i21> later
20:19:22 <str4d> Beyond that: what I need is a better roadmap, so I can do slow targeted development instead of "oh, another I2P release is coming up, I need to clear some Android work so I can do a release".
20:19:23 <zzz> ok, end weekend is feb. 7 for 0.9.24
20:19:48 <zzz> ok str4d, due date when you'll have a roadmap?
20:20:42 <zzz> anything else on item 1) ?
20:20:50 <str4d> I have a bunch of to-do items locally, in-repo and in-Trac. What I need is more eyes on planning.
20:21:30 <zzz> so you can't even give us a date, that's a bad sign. Can you throw up a draft roadmap out of your todo list?
20:21:34 <str4d> zzz, I'd say March 6, I can draft something up earlier but I expect we will end up doing roadmapping on that along with everything else while I'm over.
20:21:40 <zzz> ok, march 6
20:21:44 <zzz> last call for 1)
20:21:57 <zzz> 2) Other CCC followup - http://zzz.i2p/topics/2019 (zzz)
20:22:13 <zzz> I put 2) in here just as a placeholder in case there were other important followups
20:22:18 <str4d> I'll target Feb 26 for collating all the todo items and possibly drafting a roadmap.
20:22:26 <zzz> I've been corresponding with Phillip Winter about Sybil
20:22:39 <zzz> anybody else have interesting followups to report?
20:23:02 <eche|on> nothing from my side
20:23:25 <zzz> ok, I encourage you all to send some emails out or do the research you wanted to do, it's not too late
20:23:26 <anonimal> Were we going to cover VRP this meeting?
20:23:26 <eche|on> finances will be updated this weekend IMHO
20:23:44 <zzz> VRP is not on the agenda, if we have time we can add it as 7)
20:23:49 <zzz> last call for 2)
20:23:58 <JIa3apb_KaraHoBu4> Dear zzz ! I am very grateful to you for the creation of this network because I have met wonderful people here and find rare content, for which our country is suspended for the genitals an apple tree. Long old are you!
20:23:58 <C0B4> I'm sorry, who checked the safety 0.9.24
20:24:11 <str4d> I have a few people I need to follow up with from RWC
20:24:13 <str4d> (shoehorning that into 2))
20:24:31 <zzz> 3) Project meeting plan for 2016 (zzz, Sadie)
20:24:44 <lazygravy> While shoehorning, I need to talk to you about i2spy str4d. But that is for later/offline
20:24:57 <zzz> ok, just a brief item. We decided at the Dec. 30 meeting to get more serious about project management
20:25:03 <zzz> to hold monthly meetings
20:25:14 <zzz> and to have somebody act as a project manager
20:25:37 <zzz> so this is the first monthly meeting, and they will be the first tuesday of every month at 8 PM UTC
20:25:56 <zzz> except for next month, which will be on Thurs. Mar. 7
20:26:26 <zzz> the goal is for me to run these meetings for a little while, but after a few, to turn them over to Sadie and have her be our project manager
20:26:34 <zzz> sound good? any comments?
20:26:39 <lazygravy> Seems reasonable. Hopefully it will keep us all accountable.
20:26:59 <comraden1> La
20:27:03 <comraden1> lazygravy++
20:27:04 <anonimal> Will sadie_i21 be on IRC more often?
20:27:15 <xcps> C0B4, good point!
20:27:15 <lazygravy> anonimal++
20:27:22 <sadie_i21> okee dokee
20:27:33 <str4d> Sounds good to me
20:27:42 <zzz> that's a good point, we've repeatedly encouraged sadie_i21 to be here more often, I know she was working on a 2nd computer to make it easier
20:27:48 <str4d> sadie_i21, I still have that bouncer account - sadie - if you want it
20:28:04 <zzz> i think it will be difficult to manage the project if you aren't here very often
20:28:28 <anonimal> Hi sadie_i21, we've never officially said hi.
20:28:28 <anonimal> I have PM-related questions, but I think they can wait?
20:28:30 <str4d> That would at least enable you to not miss PMs etc.
20:28:39 <zzz> sadie_i21, any progress on getting a setup so you can be here and see scrollback?
20:28:52 <sadie_i21> hi! I am trying to be here more!!
20:28:57 <anonimal> s/PM-related/Project Management-related/
20:29:06 <comraden1> str4d: talk to me on how to set that up for sadie_i21 offline? Twitter or here is fine
20:29:14 <sadie_i21> yes, zzz - all done ansset up
20:29:43 <zzz> ok, we have the general migration plan from me to sadie, lets see how it goes over the next few months
20:29:47 <eche|on> sorry to interrupt, as sadie will get manager(in), system she needs to be organized
20:30:01 <eche|on> hardware she need, sorry
20:30:20 <zzz> echelon huh?
20:30:41 <str4d> comraden1, k
20:31:00 <zzz> anything else on 3) ?
20:31:05 <comraden1> eche|on: I setup a computer for her so that might not be necessary, but that's her call of course if she wants a new piece of equipment
20:31:14 <eche|on> zzz: sorry, we talked about a pc system she needs, and she shopuld get in contact with me
20:31:23 <zzz> ok
20:31:29 <zzz> 4) GMP 6 readiness for merging - http://zzz.i2p/topics/1960 (tuna)
20:31:35 <zzz> hottuna, what's the latest?
20:31:38 <eche|on> if thats the point, IMHO it is fine, but the meeting round here can vote yes!
20:31:56 <hottuna> jcpuid for windows x86isn't working
20:32:05 <hottuna> I have two options left to test, then I'm 100% out of ideas
20:32:40 <zzz> ok. kytv did it successfully 5 years ago, if you hit the wall maybe he can help
20:32:48 <eche|on> jcpuid is c code?
20:32:58 <hottuna> ucpuid for osx has not been compiled or tested
20:32:58 <hottuna> jcpuid*
20:33:13 <hottuna> c+asm+java-bindings
20:33:13 <zzz> I'd like to have major stuff like this propped for 0.9.25 by mid-Feb, so we have about two weeks to make it happen
20:33:24 <anonimal> hottuna: I can help with that.
20:33:31 <str4d> There's also another alternative we could look int
20:33:41 <hottuna> zzz: I can't make any promises. I'm hitting a bit of a wall here
20:33:47 <hottuna> anonimal: help with osx builds?
20:33:48 <str4d> orignal raised the point a while back that our ElGamal implementation could be a lot more efficient.
20:33:52 <hottuna> or help with windows x86?
20:34:02 <hottuna> str4d: how?
20:34:04 <str4d> (currently it just does the ElG math directly)
20:34:07 <hottuna> by having it be all c?
20:34:12 <zzz> let's not get sidetracked on ElG
20:34:17 <zzz> in the meeting
20:34:25 <str4d> hottuna, using e.g. Montgomery ladder or something
20:34:30 <str4d> Still to be looked into
20:34:35 <hottuna> ok
20:34:41 <IrcI2Pd743> C0B4 for example, nobody. All people just believe a word about the safety and anonymity of the network.
20:34:53 <zzz> ok so the summary is that hottuna needs help and the clock is ticking or we will miss .25. everybody please help if he asks
20:35:00 <anonimal> hottuna: Yes. I'm always strapped with time these days + Kovri, so I'll do what I can.
20:35:08 <zzz> anything else on 4) ?
20:35:14 <anonimal> hottuna: Latest link is in the forum post?
20:35:34 <str4d> I'm useless for testing unfortunately
20:35:36 <hottuna> links for what?
20:35:40 <hottuna> for jcpuid?
20:35:47 <orignal> str4d, 100%
20:36:18 <zzz> 5) http://secure.tinhat.i2p console home page request - http://zzz.i2p/topics/236?page=3#p10884
20:36:27 <zzz> The_Tin_Hat, please tell us about your site
20:37:10 <JIa3apb_KaraHoBu4> Justification - for the weak!
20:37:16 <The_Tin_Hat> The site provides a number of practical tutorials on privacy and security, aimed at being digestible by intermediate users, including a number of tutorials on i2p and tor
20:38:03 <The_Tin_Hat> I think its relevant for people who are just getting into I2P and/or internet security and privacy
20:38:03 <zzz> I know you've been around at thethinhat.i2p for a while, what's with the relatively new secure.thetinhat.com? how long has each been around?
20:38:08 <trolly> I know thetinhat from long
20:38:18 <trolly> I translated some of those tutorials
20:38:23 <str4d> zzz, IIUC secure.thetinhat.i2p is an EdDSA key
20:38:44 <The_Tin_Hat> thetinhat.i2p still exists, but the subdomain was added when i switched servers and upgraded the key, along with longer tunnels
20:38:53 <C0B4> I'm sorry, but I wait long for an answer to the question, or you're not respond to mere mortals>>> <C0B4> I'm sorry, who checked the safety 0.9.24
20:38:53 <zzz> anybody have any questions or comments about this request?
20:38:57 <str4d> So 5a) we need to extend the subscriptions feeds to enable key upgrades
20:39:16 <zzz> C0B4, we're in the middle of a meeting, sorry
20:39:43 <zzz> str4d, we'll talk about 5a) in the roadmap meetings next month
20:39:52 <str4d> b
20:40:15 <str4d> I am +1 on adding.
20:40:47 <hottuna> +1, add it
20:40:52 <anonimal> hottuna: Yes, jcpuid.
20:40:56 <zzz> ok re: secure.thetinhat.i2p console home page request, if there are no other questions or comments, please vote +1 or -1
20:40:59 <lazygravy> +1
20:41:13 <Yankee> Hi, gays!
20:41:23 <trolly> +1
20:41:23 <cacapo> +1
20:41:51 <comraden1> +1 for adding
20:41:53 <anonimal> hottuna: Or are we working directly from mtn now? (I haven't seen anything since I last tested)
20:42:24 <zzz> anonimal, we've moved off that topic, please discuss elsewhere, thanks
20:42:32 <zzz> ok last call for 5)
20:42:37 <z3r0fox> +1
20:43:06 <zzz> hearing no objections, we'll approve the thinhat request, I'll check it in for .25
20:43:27 <zzz> 6) Proposal for Code of Conduct - http://zzz.i2p/topics/2015 (Sadie)
20:43:27 <zzz> 6a) Proposal and reasoning (Sadie)
20:43:27 <zzz> 6b) Questions for Sadie
20:43:27 <zzz> 6c) Brief comments from those who have NOT already commented on zzz.i2p
20:43:27 <zzz> 6d) Brief Comments from those who HAVE already commented on zzz.i2p
20:43:27 <zzz> 6e) Volunteers to present specific proposal at next meeting
20:43:50 <zzz> I'd like to limit this topic to about 20 minutes. We aren't going to make any final decision today
20:43:53 <zzz> 6a) Proposal and reasoning (Sadie)
20:44:01 <zzz> sadie_i21, you're up
20:45:30 <zzz> ok we lost sadie, let's move to 6b
20:45:36 <zzz> er, 6c
20:45:40 <Yankee> zzz: Edward Snowden wrote that i2p not safe
20:45:44 <zzz> 6c) Brief comments from those who have NOT already commented on zzz.i2p
20:46:09 <zzz> if you have not already added your thoughts to the zzz.i2p thread, please comment on this proposal now
20:46:13 <orignal> 6с, imho CoC is completely useless
20:46:32 <orignal> a adult person must have it in thier head
20:47:02 <orignal> rather than create policy, CoC and other HR's sh#t
20:47:29 <comraden1> zzz: I'm for a coc (had lazygravy post a link to the nsa's coc as an example). This is part of project maturity for development and to ensure that we can get more than just programmers involved with i2p
20:47:41 <orignal> do jobs instead policies
20:47:53 <eche|on> I am on the point, as is should already be acked by us all, we can also write it down and fix the unwritten rules. No change at all.
20:48:02 <anonimal> zzz: I'm *for* a CoC.
20:48:04 * orignal believes you will get less programmers
20:48:04 <zzz> anybody else who hasn't commented on the zzz.i2p thread wish to add their thoughts?
20:48:16 <zzz> please be brief with your comments
20:49:05 <orignal> being brief. We are not going to introduce any CoC for i2pd.
20:49:18 <zzz> ok. let's circle back to 6a). sadie_i21 please fill us in on your proposal, what you had in mind, and why
20:49:19 <orignal> period
20:50:15 <Yankee> anonimal: I have not seen more boring than you...
20:50:24 <EinMByte> Probably a CoC is not very important, but I'm not against.
20:50:24 <EinMByte> It's more or less a formality
20:50:40 <anonimal> One comment:
20:50:43 <anonimal> CoC's not only protect victims but also protect offenders from making stupid decisions that have longterm consequences such as career or personal.
20:50:43 <anonimal> I can comment more in the thread. EOT.
20:50:56 <zzz> ok, 6d) let's throw it open for other comments, even if you have already commented in the zzz.i2p thread
20:51:18 <zzz> anybody feel that they weren't clear in the thread or wish to add more thoughts?
20:52:03 <sadie_i21> I was looking for feedback on the idea of having comminity standards
20:52:04 <EinMByte> anonimal: Yeah, but let's consider the fact that most offenders will be anonymous.
20:53:00 <allyourbase> What is it going to be used for? Sending to reporters? Expell project members?
20:53:02 <sadie_i21> to zzz's point, in line with the maturity of the project
20:53:08 <lazygravy> I feel similar to EinMByte. It is either useless, or good. Not some end of the world event as some have made it seem
20:53:08 <anonimal> EinMByte: So far, I've seen 50/50 on that (one anonymous, one not anonymous) but I see your point.
20:53:08 <lazygravy> Useless meaning a net zero, not negative
20:53:08 <C0B4> anonimal, it is a priori a criminal. Why defend him&
20:53:09 <zzz> sadie, you simply wanted general feedback on the idea of any standard or CoC at all? You haven't (yet) offered a specific example to consider
20:53:26 <comraden1> EinMByte: ideally we can start with ways to address this. I will link this again https://github.com/NationalSecurityAgency/SIMP/blob/master/Community_Code_of_Conduct.md as I think the guideline violations part is something we can enforce
20:53:31 <psi> A CoC is useless and a shot in the foot IMO
20:53:37 <EinMByte> anonimal: Well if you plan on offending people, it's probably wise to remain anonymous ;).
20:53:39 <psi> PR wise
20:53:39 <Yankee> zzz: I wrote that the Russian written on the client C++. It's true?
20:53:57 <zzz> Yankee, we're in the middle of a meeting, sorry
20:54:00 <sadie_i21> also, would having one help us if we were to apply for grants, etc
20:54:21 <EinMByte> sadie_i21: That might be true, good point.
20:54:33 <zab__> orly? grants are important
20:54:34 <psi> also i have been accused of spreading FUD
20:54:38 <lazygravy> Debian and thousands of other projects use one and their PR is fine. How do you contest this?
20:54:39 <sadie_i21> thanks to everyone who took the time to share ideas on the forum btw about this
20:54:50 <anonimal> Yankee: Pashol na xyi :)
20:54:53 * orignal agress with zab__
20:55:22 * orignal is for CoC after last anonimal's phrse
20:55:30 <psi> lazygravy: saddie just proposed community standards which you said never would happen
20:55:33 <comraden1> zab__: this is what sadie_i21is referring to, new stance by the NSF in America https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=137466
20:55:41 <anonimal> sadie_i21: Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
20:55:59 <str4d> sadie_i21, did you mean the community as a whole, or just the dev community?
20:56:00 <lazygravy> psi: the FUD needs to stop. Its the dev community
20:56:01 <zzz> ok, sadie_i21 would you like to come back at the next meeting with a specific proposal? or not proceed? what's the next step?
20:56:09 <Yankee> anonimal: what?
20:56:11 <psi> lazygravy: it's not fud...
20:56:24 <orignal> guys, I'm sorry do you believe swearing is aloowed here?
20:56:32 <sadie_i21> not the community as a whole - no.
20:56:44 <nda> CoC. what you will do with 'bad people' technically? (sorry for my en)
20:56:44 <IrcI2Pd743> sadie_i21, r u not a HR for a living?
20:57:06 <lazygravy> psi: it is. But this is a offline discussion.
20:57:09 * zab__ smiles
20:57:25 <zab__> Yankee: подожди, сейчас встреча
20:57:25 <nda> wrote letters to government or what?
20:57:34 <C0B4> an
20:57:45 <psi> a CoC is the wrong thing for i2p
20:57:52 <zzz> do we have any volunteers to work on a specific proposal for next month, in light of the comments here and on the zzz.i2p thread?
20:57:52 <C0B4> anonimal, ты не хотел бы извиниться за мат?
20:58:07 <orignal> zab__, один мудак позоволил себе вольность послать нах при женщинах
20:58:15 <eche|on> nda: in last line of work, exclude from our java main fork dev work for some time?
20:58:17 <IrcI2Pd743> anonimal, вот да. Мы, вообще-то, не ругаемся, сдерживаемся. А ты?
20:58:21 <zzz> guys, please stay on topic and in english, thanks
20:58:23 <sadie_i21> lets come up with a proposal for the next meeting
20:58:40 <zzz> ok, anybody volunteer to work with sadie?
20:58:44 <orignal> zzz, anonimal was firsr
20:58:53 <IrcI2Pd743> zzz, sorry, but and you developer first
20:58:56 <comraden1> zzz: I can assist whoever with links to ideas, etc. I can't commit myself to doing all the work because of my life falling apart at the moment :)
20:58:58 <orignal> he sais something very offensive for everybody
20:59:02 <IrcI2Pd743> *your
20:59:04 <nda> eche|on oh thanks for your answer
20:59:10 <zab__> I promise to read the CoC thoroughly and have an opinion
20:59:19 <anonimal> zzz sadie_i21: I would like to help.
20:59:35 <lazygravy> I do not think we have agreed on a specific text
20:59:48 <anonimal> I need to spend a little more java i2p time than a VRP and rewriting/reorganzing docs.
20:59:49 <lazygravy> (Which is super important, IMO. One could be worded horribly)
21:00:04 <zzz> ok. In summary it appears that more "team members" (either checkin privs or on our team page) are in favor than opposed, while among non-team-members, more are opposed
21:00:21 <str4d> lazygravy, yep. And I wouldn't think that specific text would even be agreed on at next meting
21:00:21 <str4d> meeting*
21:00:25 <zzz> I think both groups are important to consider, as non-team-members may become team members
21:00:39 <zab__> we would ideally come up with more than one candidate coc
21:00:41 <str4d> I think that we have a bunch of proposals, as well as several reasons for and against.
21:01:13 <zzz> As I suspect I will be the final arbiter of any code or process, I'm not at all eager to adopt anything that doesn't have broad or near-unanimous consensus
21:01:21 <str4d> A good starting point would be for some people to review the proposed options, looking at pros and cons
21:01:38 <zzz> ok, sadie sounds like your name is on the assignment to bring something back next month
21:01:44 <zzz> anything else on 6) ?
21:02:02 <sadie_i21> noted
21:02:10 <str4d> Additional research around the positive and negative impressions of "CoC"s or similar would be useful (e.g. the grants issue above, or the negative impressions that appear to be main objections)
21:02:16 <EinMByte> I can't make up my mind until I actually get to see a proposal, I think
21:02:17 <str4d> But that would be more involved
21:02:34 <nda> and with CoC you will nothing to do with 'bad people' who not from your i2p-team?
21:02:44 <zzz> last call for 6)
21:02:57 <lazygravy> str4d++
21:03:09 <str4d> nda, the CoC or whatever would only be for the I2P dev team, yes
21:03:25 * lazygravy afks, irl came up
21:03:27 <eche|on> nda: why should we? it is for our i2p-dev-team
21:03:29 <str4d> Basically, we need more data.
21:03:40 <nda> str4d ok thank you
21:03:44 <psi> (for now)
21:03:45 <comraden1> zab__: not a bad idea. It makes sense to look at what's available that we can copy from rather than roll our own
21:03:49 <zzz> ok, I declare an end to 6), thanks everybody
21:03:59 <zzz> 7) VRP anonimal go
21:04:03 <str4d> In essence, it would be an extension to the developer agreements we already have to sign.
21:04:40 <anonimal> Re: VRP: I'm awaiting respones from zzz and str4d and community.
21:04:57 <anonimal> Then I can re-write and wrap-up the ticket.
21:04:59 <nda> i thinked that this something like "Call Police this is bad man in I2P!" really sorry )
21:05:01 <comraden1> And to add to str4d's point, it would also ensure a baseline for those who didn't sign a dev agreement (like myself)
21:05:08 <str4d> anonimal, oh, have there been further updates? Sorry I missed them.
21:05:09 <zzz> i don't have the ticket number in front of me. what do you need? I know str4d met with Kate recently. str4d what's the latest?
21:05:26 <eche|on> what is VRP`
21:05:26 <eche|on> ?
21:05:36 <str4d> eche|on, Vulnerability Response Process
21:05:37 <anonimal> http://trac.i2p2.i2p/ticket/1119
21:05:37 <zzz> anonimal, you have that ticket?
21:05:39 <eche|on> ah, ok
21:05:52 <eche|on> a complicated topic
21:06:04 <zzz> i don't think we've even decided to use H1 yet, have we? But clearly they've made a big splash recently
21:06:15 <str4d> zzz, I haven't followed up with Katie yet regarding the OSS bug bounty program (thesis), but will do so this week.
21:06:38 <str4d> I certainly got a good impression from her, as well as from their response on our ticket
21:06:38 <zzz> would this be a good thing to decide on once and for all during our roadmap meetings next month?
21:06:40 <anonimal> I think that was the biggest hurdle: the H1 decision.
21:06:40 <anonimal> They commented in the ticket, made their case,
21:06:41 <anonimal> I've made my case,
21:06:43 <anonimal> kay made their case,
21:06:52 <str4d> Katie also had good comments about the process we are going through
21:07:33 <zzz> I'm not sure we'll be able to focus enough to make decisions before march. I'm a little overwhelmed though with the detail in the ticket. It may be too much. but maybe not.
21:08:02 <zzz> str4d, how and when should we tackle this?
21:08:37 <str4d> Katie liked the detail and lengths we were going to making sure we got this right, FWIW
21:08:52 <zzz> fine, but I care what you think, not katie so much :)
21:09:05 <str4d> zzz, if we did manage to get into the same bug bounty program Tor is on, I think that would probably decide it for us
21:09:09 <zzz> how and when do we get to an answer
21:09:37 <str4d> because I think we'd have a larger influx of researchers than if we just had a free page
21:09:47 <anonimal> Since this was postponed from December's meeting, I'm not exciting for another postponement
21:09:47 <anonimal> But I really am in no place to argue or make requests.
21:09:47 <anonimal> So, whatever works for everyone else.
21:09:47 <anonimal> s/exciting/excited/
21:09:55 <zzz> yeah but independent of H1, we need a process
21:10:04 <str4d> Yep
21:10:24 <zzz> so I propse we work on it during the roadmap meetings in march. OK?
21:10:31 <str4d> I will review anonimal's latest changes next week.
21:10:41 <zzz> ok, I'll do that too
21:10:49 <zzz> anything else on 7) ?
21:10:54 <str4d> By Feb 12
21:11:02 <IrcI2Pd743> anonimal, It was frustrating when you allowed yourself to swear around me.
21:11:18 <anonimal> Did my last 4 lines get through?
21:11:18 * comraden1 has to run afk
21:11:29 <zzz> anything else for the meeting?
21:11:32 <str4d> anonimal, I saw up to s/
21:11:40 <IrcI2Pd743> anonimal, I demand an apology.
21:11:42 * zzz warms up the *baffer
21:11:52 <anonimal> I'll review the meeting log, I think I missed a bunch of text.
21:11:57 <orignal> 8) anonimal's phrase
21:12:09 * zzz *bafffs* the meeting closed

9
i2p2www/meetings/logs/242.rst Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
I2P dev meeting, February 2, 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
=============================================
Quick recap
-----------
* **Present:**
i2p-devs,

230
i2p2www/meetings/logs/243.log Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,230 @@
20:00:02 <zzz> 0) Hi
20:00:02 <zzz> 1) Review of old assigned tasks still open from Dec. 30 meeting http://zzz.i2p/topics/2014
20:00:02 <zzz> 2) Review of new assigned tasks from Feb. 2 meeting http://zzz.i2p/topics/2014
20:00:02 <zzz> 3) Prep and schedule for roadmap meetings http://zzz.i2p/topics/2021
20:00:02 <zzz> 4) Code of Conduct proposal (Sadie) http://zzz.i2p/topics/2015?page=2
20:00:12 <zzz> 0) Hi
20:00:15 <zzz> hi
20:00:25 <anonimal> Hi
20:00:38 <str4d> Hi
20:01:07 <zzz> 1) Review of old assigned tasks still open from Dec. 30 meeting http://zzz.i2p/topics/2014
20:01:19 <hottuna4> hi
20:01:37 <zzz> gravy to post one on encrypted leasesets by Jan. 27, or different topic, by Feb. 15
20:01:51 <zzz> anybody know about gravy's status?
20:03:13 <anonimal> Nope.
20:03:47 <sadie_i2p> busy irl
20:04:07 <zzz> sadie_i2p, you have a new date from him?
20:04:24 <sadie_i2p> waiting for new date from Gravy
20:04:33 <zzz> ok, we'll roll it over to next meeting
20:04:42 <zzz> Sadie to work with J to get his reseed blog post up, new date mid-Feb.
20:04:49 <zzz> sadie_i2p, what's the latest on this?
20:05:42 <sadie_i2p> J is busy also, working with Back up
20:06:07 <zzz> sadie_i2p, is a blog post going to happen at this point or should we move on?
20:06:44 <sadie_i2p> back up and I working on something else at this point - blog post will probably not happen
20:06:58 <zzz> ok, I'll scratch it off the list
20:07:02 <sadie_i2p> move on
20:07:17 <zzz> Sadie to contact backup to discuss reseed campaign, new date mid-Feb.
20:07:32 <zzz> sadie_i2p, what are you and backup cooking up?
20:07:34 <anonimal> Feb?
20:07:54 <zzz> yes anonimal these are all past-due items
20:08:26 <sadie_i2p> new content and graphics
20:08:51 <zzz> for the website i presume
20:08:55 <sadie_i2p> there will be delays on this due to schedules but back up is now working on content and I am working on graphics for the site
20:09:15 <zzz> what about the "campaign" beyond the website itself?
20:09:30 <zzz> what do you guys have planned? and when?
20:09:34 <eche|on> great
20:09:47 <sadie_i2p> we will prepare a new page for the site and then begin directing people there via social media etc...
20:10:00 <sadie_i2p> maybe use new stickers as incentive too
20:10:10 <eche|on> stickers!
20:10:17 <zzz> ooh yeah, stickers to reseeders, great idea
20:10:19 <str4d> Is this a "what is reseed" page, or a "how to run a reseed" guide?
20:10:49 <sadie_i2p> this is a new how to run a reseed guide
20:11:36 <zzz> sadie_i2p, can you please give us the next milestone for this? (date, what it is)
20:12:12 <str4d> This would be a guide for "users" of or contributors to I2P then, rather than developers
20:12:26 <str4d> So I'll think of a better place to put these guides
20:13:07 <sadie_i2p> this has the potential to take a bit longer - I will say in two months time latest
20:13:10 <str4d> except hmm...
20:13:21 <sadie_i2p> The guide will be for users of and contributors
20:13:45 <zzz> sadie_i2p, please give us an intermediate milestone for next month
20:13:59 <sadie_i2p> can probably provide content up date in one month
20:14:02 <str4d> Actually, I guess it does belong under "Get involved -> Guides"
20:14:11 <zzz> ok great
20:14:16 <zzz> moving on
20:14:26 <zzz> str4d, gravy, cacapo: Add use cases, what are we best at, more "passion" and "fat", add / highlight Bote, by end of
20:14:39 <zzz> January OPEN, new date March 1
20:14:50 <zzz> I saw that cacapo wrote up some nice use cases
20:15:06 <str4d> Yah, based on dymaxion's examples
20:15:11 <zzz> str4d, what's the status on pulling that into the website along with some passion and fat?
20:15:21 <Yankee> Hello ladies and gentlemen!
20:15:35 <str4d> IMHO the content needs a little polishing (feels a bit too "I2P to the rescue!")
20:16:03 <str4d> As for where on the site, I'm still not quite sure where to fit this in
20:16:05 <zzz> str4d, was due march 1, can you give us a new date for getting this on to the website?
20:16:45 <str4d> The "goal" of this item was to do something better than the current middle-column of the front-page and the supported applications page
20:18:02 <str4d> zzz, I can put the page up at a URL
20:18:42 <zzz> are you and sadie_i2p on the same page on what this work item is? sadie added this to the todo list at ccc
20:20:29 <str4d> It
20:20:45 <str4d> 's a start, but we still need to figure out the broader information architecture
20:20:57 <str4d> what it is we are actually trying to convey with the homepage
20:21:42 <zzz> ok so give me a date for the first part
20:21:49 <zzz> please
20:22:12 <str4d> I will migrate the use cases document to the website by the end of this week
20:22:42 <str4d> And a further status report at the next meeting on the homepage rearchitecture
20:23:04 <zzz> ok great, hopefully you and sadie can discuss the details on the larger goals of fat and passion.
20:23:39 <zzz> comraden to edit / polish / enhance / post I2P story by end of February
20:24:13 <zzz> anybody know what comraden1 is up to? I need the edited draft back from him, then I want to take one more pass at it
20:25:00 <zzz> this was due on the website monday
20:25:30 <sadie_i2p> new date is April 1
20:25:59 <zzz> ok. i need the draft back from him in a couple weeks then
20:26:14 <anonimal> zzz: Link to present story draft?
20:26:39 <zzz> what's on zzzi2p is still the latest. I don't want to make any changes while comraden1 has the "master"
20:26:53 <zzz> ok moving on
20:27:09 <zzz> tickets: Sadie to review, make recommendations or possibly start managing them (by when?) OPEN - new date mid-Feb. (?)
20:27:09 <anonimal> Ok.
20:27:30 <zzz> sadie_i2p, how's this big task going?
20:28:06 <sadie_i2p> ugh
20:29:12 <zzz> need a little more than just ugh :)
20:29:14 <str4d> It was a sizeable task :P
20:29:35 <sadie_i2p> str4d and I have talked about weekly ticket meetings
20:29:56 <zzz> that could be more feasible than some one-time 'review'
20:30:06 <str4d> I thought I brought this up at an earlier meeting, but in case I didn't: I added an "open" status to Trac, to denote tickets we devs have seen but there is no one assigned or no particular status.
20:30:26 <str4d> My goal of that was to differentiate those tickets from actually-new tickets
20:30:26 <sadie_i2p> yes it would
20:30:26 <zzz> sadie_i2p, have you gotten into it enough to make any recommendations on how we are managing tickets?
20:31:08 <str4d> So the pile of "new" tickets is a darn sight smaller now I've kicked the ones we opened ourselves
20:31:15 <sadie_i2p> at this point my best recommendation is weekly check in and triage
20:32:34 <str4d> +1
20:32:34 <zzz> ok. are we ready yet to schedule the first meeting or is there more organizing to do first?
20:33:28 <str4d> I'm still travelling, so I'd prefer to wait until next week
20:33:46 <zzz> ok. if you haven't scheduled anything before the April meeting, we will ping you then
20:34:05 <zzz> str4d Android 0.9.24 release by Feb 7, TODO list collated by Feb. 26
20:34:21 <zzz> seems like you're behind on those :)
20:34:28 <str4d> Heh
20:34:34 <zzz> new dates?
20:34:37 <str4d> Both of those failed miserably, because PhD thesis
20:34:55 <str4d> (which I *finally* got submitted mid-Feb)
20:35:04 <str4d> I'm working on cutting 0.9.24 as we speak
20:35:06 <zzz> woot.
20:35:10 <str4d> (on sloooooow laptop()
20:35:14 <str4d> )
20:35:16 <zzz> and the todo list?
20:35:31 <str4d> Todo list collation will happen in the next few days
20:35:41 <zzz> ok, we're going to hold you to it
20:35:51 <str4d> heh :P
20:36:01 <zzz> str4d and zzz to review VRP ticket by Feb 12. I did my side.
20:36:06 <str4d> It's mainly just going through the in-repo todo list and looking for things missing from my personal todo list
20:36:14 <zzz> new date for that?
20:36:20 <anonimal> Re: #1119, I'm just now seeing zzz's latest comment from 3 weeks ago. I never received an email nor have I been receiving emails from github or other things over the past few weeks to @mail.i2p/@i2pmail.org.
20:36:32 <anonimal> I'm seriously wondering if postman's email service is having problems.
20:36:37 <str4d> Another thesis casualty. I'll read through it this afternoon after 0.9.24 is out
20:36:46 <anonimal> I may have to switch email :/
20:36:49 <zzz> ok great
20:36:49 <str4d> anonimal, yah, I have had serious issues lately too (lots of email getting bounced)
20:37:03 <zzz> believe it or not, I think that's all for 1)
20:37:11 <zzz> and 2)
20:37:17 <str4d> (since about Feb 6ish)
20:37:22 <anonimal> zzz: I'll read your comments more in-depth and rewrite the VRP.
20:37:28 <zzz> 3) Prep and schedule for roadmap meetings http://zzz.i2p/topics/2021
20:37:33 <anonimal> Wait!
20:37:45 <zzz> ok, sorry, anything else on 1 or 2?
20:37:45 <anonimal> For 1): decision on H1?
20:38:06 <anonimal> The decision on H1 was moved to 1) from what I remember.
20:38:41 <anonimal> Or not, either way I think we'll cover it today.
20:38:47 <zzz> at the last meeting, we decided we would wrap up the VRP and h1 discussions at the roadmap meetings march 4-6
20:39:11 <anonimal> K.
20:39:23 <zzz> I just schedule those, we're going to do them tomorrow and sunday at 3 PM UTC. anonimal can you make either of those meetings?
20:39:30 <str4d> Woo, that gives me a chance to review :P
20:41:08 <zzz> so that takes us to 3)
20:41:11 <zzz> as I said
20:41:19 <zzz> I just schedule those, we're going to do them tomorrow and sunday at 3 PM UTC.
20:41:21 <anonimal> zzz: Eek, saturday is kovri's whopping two hour minimum 6pm UTC meeting.
20:41:21 * anonimal thinking
20:41:23 <anonimal> zzz: How long do you think saturday's meeting will run to?
20:41:33 <orignal_> does everybody have to care about kovri meeting here?
20:41:40 <zzz> our meetings will be friday and sunday. no saturday.
20:41:46 <orignal_> or it can be sorted out privately?
20:42:05 <zzz> I propose we do VRP first thing in the sunday meeting. ok?
20:42:06 * anonimal lost track of days
20:42:11 <anonimal> I can do Sunday.
20:42:16 <anonimal> Ok, sounds great.
20:43:00 <zzz> these are going to be informal meetings, reviewing where we are at and where we want to go
20:43:11 <zzz> the goal is to set a roadmap for the rest of the year at least
20:43:22 <zzz> the second meeting may be more structured
20:43:46 <zzz> I'm kindof stuck on what I should be doing next and for the rest of the year. so these meetings are vital to\
20:43:52 <zzz> setting the direction for me
20:44:08 <str4d> Mmmk
20:44:15 <anonimal> K.
20:44:37 <zzz> so friday will be more informal review or priorities. Sunday we'll start with h1/vrp, then move to really nail down the roadmap for .26-.29
20:44:47 <zzz> anything else on 3)
20:45:31 <zzz> moving on to 4)
20:45:39 <zzz> 4) Code of Conduct proposal (Sadie) http://zzz.i2p/topics/2015?page=2
20:45:56 <zzz> i see she's now proposed doing something similar to debian
20:46:00 <zzz> ah back just in time
20:46:12 <zzz> anybody have any thoughts on the debian coc?
20:46:48 <orignal_> dedian is not an anonymous network
20:46:56 * str4d pulls up the link
20:47:05 <str4d> orignal_, no, but it is FOSS
20:47:08 <zzz> but what's your thoughts on their CoC orignal_ ?
20:47:17 <orignal_> people comes to I2P for different reasons
20:47:33 <anonimal> IMO, it's a little limp and I'm not sure how anything is enforced.
20:48:02 <orignal_> zzz, their CoC is suitable for them since it's an established project with history
20:48:04 <zzz> sadie, what do you like about the debian CoC?
20:48:14 <orignal_> I2P is completely different
20:48:32 <sadie_i2p> it seemed to provide a good basic structure for us to start with at least
20:48:40 <str4d> orignal_, and I2P's >10-year history doesn't make it an established project?
20:48:45 <zzz> sure, we're different, but we are indeed an established project with history
20:48:51 <orignal_> the last things people come here to listen this HR's BS again
20:49:31 <zzz> I dont see what the reasons have for coming to a project has to do with the standards for how they should behave once they get here
20:49:41 <zzz> HR?
20:50:31 <sadie_i2p> I am looking for examples that are simple and to the point -
20:50:31 <sadie_i2p> so perhaps not the best, but somewhere to start
20:51:29 <zzz> do we think the debian one is the best place to start, or would the monero be better
20:51:36 <orignal_> str4d, unfortunally not
20:51:51 <str4d> orignal_, "people != developers", once again.
20:51:53 <orignal_> compare how many people use Debian and I2P
20:52:11 <orignal_> donn't try to copy a big guys, you are not at that league yet
20:52:12 <str4d> We can't conflate users with developers.
20:52:21 <zzz> I think if we can pick the one closest to our goal, then we can ask some people to work on editing it to fit our situation
20:52:42 <str4d> That would be like saying "anyone who installs Debian OS cannot say anything we don't like"
20:52:42 <str4d> That is *not* what the point is here
20:52:53 <str4d> And therefore, userbase does not matter for this discussion
20:52:54 <sadie_i2p> monero has a very good one as well - if this is better of the two I have no objection
20:53:21 <orignal_> zzz, CoC is a HR's stuff
20:53:21 <orignal_> nothing else
20:53:28 <zzz> opinions from others on debian vs. monero ?
20:53:44 <anonimal> + Monero
20:53:49 <zzz> orignal_, what do you mean by "HR"?
20:54:07 <orignal_> HR = human resource
20:54:24 <zzz> moneros is shorter than debian, so I guess it's easier to start small
20:55:13 <zzz> do we have any volunteers to mark up the monero CoC with proposed changes and come back with it next month?
20:55:18 <str4d> zzz, I like the essence of the Debian one, in that it covers a lot of what I think we care about (e.g. point 2 would have been very useful recently)
20:55:26 <zzz> or the debian one
20:55:28 <orignal_> my opinion again, it's a time for it yet
20:55:40 <zzz> we don't have to decide now on debian vs monero
20:55:48 <zzz> orignal_, we got your message loud and clear, thanks
20:55:59 <str4d> And it isn't too prescriptive
20:56:13 <zzz> no decisions made. we're just discussing.
20:56:40 <sadie_i2p> we can use what is most applicable from both
20:56:43 <anonimal> Re: CoC,
20:56:56 <str4d> I also like point 6 - that in responding to issues, the responder should also be respectful of the CoC
20:57:03 <anonimal> https://github.com/monero-project/kovri/blob/master/doc/CONTRIBUTING.md
20:57:09 <anonimal> Also includes beautiful Monero governance process graphic.
20:57:30 <comraden1> zzz: re: draft -- I've been hit with an increase of crap at work and I'm dealing with a family member who went back into remission, so the history draft got put on the back burner. sadie_i2p mentioned 2016-04-01 as the new date which I'll try to meet
20:57:30 <str4d> Ooh, pictures!
20:57:48 <comraden1> zzz: apologies for being out of the loop for a few weeks!
20:58:06 <anonimal> str4d zzz: Yeah, and I'd be willing to patch the contributing guide to suit java i2p.
20:58:52 <anonimal> Hi comraden1, I'm posting something to the story of i2p page for review.
20:59:30 <sadie_i2p> i'll volunteer
20:59:58 <comraden1> anonimal: hey thanks :) if it's on forum I'll get to it next time I hop on. Feel free to pm it to me or reach out on clearnet
21:00:05 <zzz> ok, excellent. Sadie_i2p and anonimal, can you come back with a recommendation at next month's meeting?
21:00:20 <sadie_i2p> sure
21:00:25 <zzz> comraden1, thanks for the update, sorry to hear about the family issues
21:00:31 <zzz> anything else on 4) ?
21:00:40 * zzz warms up the baffer
21:00:48 <zzz> anything else for the meeting?
21:00:54 <orignal_> yes, writing CoC for somebody seems a better work
21:01:13 <anonimal> Yes, though because i2pmail is problematic lately, sadie_i2p and I should try to chat over IRC if possible.
21:01:21 <anonimal> No, nothing else for meeting from me zzz.
21:01:52 <zzz> orignal_, please do not interrupt our meeting with snide comments about kovri. It went way too far last month and I promised I wouldn't let it happen again
21:02:07 <orignal_> did I?
21:02:41 * zzz *bafs* the meeting closed
21:02:45 <zzz> thanks everybody

9
i2p2www/meetings/logs/243.rst Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
I2P dev meeting, March 3, 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
==========================================
Quick recap
-----------
* **Present:**
i2p-devs,

320
i2p2www/meetings/logs/244.log Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,320 @@
15:00:05 <zzz> 0) hi
15:00:23 <zzz> 1) structure for these meetings
15:00:32 <zzz> 2) roadmap discussion
15:00:37 <zzz> 0) hi
15:00:41 <zzz> hi
15:00:54 <str4d> hi
15:01:02 <xcps_> hi!
15:01:27 <orignal_> what's up?
15:02:18 <zzz> please review the thread at http://zzz.i2p/topics/2021 and the current roadmap at http://i2p-projekt.i2p/en/get-involved/roadmap
15:02:27 <zzz> 1) structure for these meetings
15:03:22 <zzz> should we go straight into the roadmap or should we talk about high-level priorities first?
15:03:53 <str4d> I'd go with the latter first
15:04:41 <zzz> ok, so in the thread, I threw out two priorities - grow the network, and increase security
15:04:55 <zzz> how do those sound as high-level principles?
15:05:25 <zzz> let's first decide what's important
15:05:32 <EinMByte> They sound as expected, I think
15:05:48 <EinMByte> "grow the network" should be in the broad meaning, though
15:05:57 <str4d> I think those are great as broad themes
15:06:03 <zzz> anonimal threw out a whole bunch more in the thread, but that wasn't really what I was going for
15:06:13 <xcps_> increasing security should be always the most important imho
15:06:28 <zzz> other principles we should consider as we review the roadmap?
15:06:28 <str4d> What IMHO we need to do here is figure out what those actually mean in terms of potential deliverables
15:06:40 <EinMByte> So "grow the network" should also mean "increase research attention"
15:07:00 <zzz> grow the network means a huge variety of stuff - see the thread
15:07:09 <str4d> EinMByte, yah, I think I might have mentioned that in the thread
15:07:36 <zzz> we'll figure out what these mean shortly. at this minute let's agree on whats important.
15:07:58 <str4d> Usability is of big importance to me, and IMHO feeds into the above two areas
15:07:58 <zzz> everything is possible if we keep growing. once we stop growing we are dead
15:08:05 <zzz> agreed str4d
15:08:41 <str4d> More immediately in terms of increasing our userbase, and more long-term in terms of increasing our public exposure, ease of use by researchers etc.
15:09:11 <EinMByte> Note also that growing is the only way to attract researchers
15:09:25 <zzz> more users bring more devs and more researchers and more content and and and
15:09:37 <EinMByte> Large networks are generally more interesting to study
15:10:05 <EinMByte> So I think we call all agree on those 2 priorities
15:10:16 <zzz> the bulk of our growth in the last year has been from vuze. Which is great but I'd love to have more 'native' growth also
15:10:43 <zzz> but maybe growth in embedded apps, or focusing on applications in general, is the easiest path to growth
15:10:48 <str4d> Yep
15:11:04 <EinMByte> zzz: For a lot of people, it's easier to use an application that runs I2P in the background and handles the configuration for them
15:11:12 <sadie> hi - a little late to the party
15:11:20 <zzz> hi sadie glad you made it
15:11:23 <str4d> That IMHO will come from usability improvements for both the UI and APIs
15:11:42 <str4d> The latter we have already been working on in various threads
15:11:48 <zzz> in some ways, it's the apps that are the UI experts, let them bundle i2p and expose (or hide) it as they see best
15:11:58 <str4d> Mmm
15:12:08 <EinMByte> str4d: That's a different solution to the same problem, yes. And I like it more because bundling I2P with everything doesn't scale IMHO
15:12:30 <str4d> That is kinda the approach I was taking with Android
15:13:04 <EinMByte> There needs to be a way to ensure that people don't have an I2P instance for every application
15:13:12 <zzz> ok, anything else on 1) or should we move on to looking at the roadmap itself?
15:14:00 <str4d> I think everyone here appears to be in rough agreement
15:14:08 <str4d> (no dissent at least :P)
15:14:14 <zzz> let me copy in the lines from the thread. Not as gospel, just for reference
15:14:25 <zzz> Grow the Network
15:14:25 <zzz> Includes: Marketing, joint projects, bundling more stuff, helping others bundle i2p, usability, website improvements, more translations, talks and presentations, articles and stories, UI, Android, Android apps, better GFW evasion, orchid, more libs and tools for client devs, better support for huge websites, supporting alternative router dev, alliances, speedups and efficiency, capacity, increasing limits, getting in
15:14:25 <zzz> to Debian, ...
15:14:25 <zzz> Increase security
15:14:25 <zzz> Includes: Crypto migration, subscription protocol, new transport protocols, pluggable transports, LS2, NTCP2, new DH, key revocation, key storage, code review, sybil, bug fixes, naming, SSL, ...
15:14:46 <zzz> ok, let's move on to 2) the roadmap itself
15:15:10 <zzz> url is http://i2p-projekt.i2p/en/get-involved/roadmap
15:15:50 <zzz> .25 is pretty much done, release in about 10 days, so let's look at the next 4 releases 26-29 for this year
15:16:00 <zzz> which should carry us thru to ccc
15:16:15 <EinMByte> If something is under 2017, e.g., does that mean we start looking into it only then, or does that mean we start the implementation at that point?
15:16:41 <str4d> In terms of things we *need* to do, I'd rank the crypto migration and sybil work as high up there
15:16:42 <zzz> 1mb, we certainly do want to get started on big 2017 things now, like new crypto/dh, ntcp2, etc
15:17:04 <EinMByte> Also, eclipse attacks are a problem right now, IMHO
15:17:05 <zzz> so the roadmap could include prepatory work for those
15:17:23 <str4d> EinMByte, yah, I was bundling that under Sybil
15:17:36 <EinMByte> The whole midnight rotation idea doesn't work and there should be better alternatives, I suppose
15:17:52 <zzz> agreed
15:18:05 <EinMByte> str4d: Sure, it's reasonable to classify them as the same type of attack
15:18:44 <str4d> EinMByte, I discussed this with a few people at RWC
15:18:48 <str4d> Got some thoughts, but hard to discuss right here
15:18:51 <EinMByte> zzz: So if we want to get started on NTCP2/... by 2017 we will need to plan preliminary work
15:18:58 <zzz> right 1mb
15:19:02 <str4d> Yep
15:19:20 <str4d> I want to have planning and research on the roadmap :)
15:19:28 <zzz> here's the issue. I should be working on 26 right now and I don't know what's in it
15:19:39 <orignal_> is it possible to add random padding to existsing NTCP?
15:20:01 <str4d> orignal_, not that I recall, but check the NTCP2 thread
15:20:02 <zzz> so let's spend 10 minutes planning 26, then we can move to the longer term
15:20:13 <str4d> k
15:20:14 <zzz> tell me what I should be doing today
15:20:30 <EinMByte> True, let's focus on that first
15:20:34 <zzz> ok let's see what's on the 25 list that didnt happen
15:20:50 <zzz> wrapper didnt happen, kytv is awol
15:20:54 <EinMByte> "crypto enhancements" is pretty broad
15:21:12 <zzz> what actually happened on crytpo enhancements were some 25519 speedups
15:21:34 <zzz> so the .25 list all actually is in there except wrapper
15:22:00 <zzz> but there's more to do on sybil so lets keep that on the 26 list
15:22:08 <str4d> Great
15:22:25 <str4d> We bumped GMP 6 to .26 because of the need for more testing
15:22:35 <zzz> what else on the 26 list now should be in there or moved
15:23:05 <EinMByte> Eventually preventing sybil will probably be a lot of work, so it seems long-term to me
15:23:10 <EinMByte> (in the sense that we need a good literature review first)
15:23:15 <zzz> orignal, yeah, ntcp w/ padding is ntcp2
15:23:21 <str4d> EinMByte, the Sybil detection tool isn't used for anything yet, that is where more planning is needed :)
15:23:49 <zzz> hottuna4 is unavailable for a month, not sure when that month is up, so gmp6 may or not make it into 26
15:24:02 <str4d> K
15:24:37 <str4d> Subscription protocol improvements for addressbook: that is something that would be very good to add in ASAP, so old Dest owners can migrate to Ed25519
15:24:37 <EinMByte> I think CRLs don't really need a question mark
15:24:47 <str4d> But how long will that actually take to do?
15:25:14 <zzz> we'll need some status update from tuna soon, I expect the deadline for propping big stuff for 26 would be late march / 1st week of april
15:26:10 * str4d still doesn't quite understand the CRL stuff, could zzz expand?
15:26:14 <zzz> 25 will have ability to read crls from disk, so we can include in the update
15:26:35 <zzz> but thats not so helpful because in an update we can just remove the cert and that does the same thign
15:26:56 <zzz> so to get crls out to ppl w/o having to do an update, we would put them in the feed
15:26:57 <str4d> I'm just trying to figure out the use case
15:27:09 <zzz> use case is somebody gets compromised
15:27:20 <str4d> Do we still not do cert pinning?
15:27:30 <zzz> no
15:27:56 <zzz> so i've done 90 % of it and just need to stick the crl into the namespace
15:28:46 <zzz> pinning is tricky and dangerous
15:29:05 <zzz> crypto cat did the 'pinning suicide'
15:29:17 <zzz> where they were pinned but an intermediate changed
15:30:49 <zzz> i don't think pinning replaces cls
15:30:51 <zzz> crls
15:31:21 <zzz> crls not just for ssl, there's reseed and update keys
15:31:58 <zzz> can we keep crls on the list for 26 then? it's almost done
15:32:20 <str4d> What I'm concerned re: pinning is that someone could do e.g. a Quantum Insert-like thing to redirect a reseed domain name, and just put up any valid SSL cert satisfying the domain name requirement, and the routers will accept it
15:33:05 <str4d> And re: CRLs, if we use that to disable a particular certificate, what does that certificate get replaced with?
15:33:25 <zzz> nothing. in the next release there would presumably be a replacement
15:33:45 <str4d> This is getting a bit far into the weeds
15:34:07 <str4d> I think where I was going is we need to think this over a bit more
15:34:24 <zzz> ok so let's keep crls for 26 but let's discuss the details on it in the next week or two
15:34:30 <zzz> as it's not 100% clear
15:34:38 <zzz> moving on
15:34:42 <zzz> what else ont he 26 list
15:34:43 <str4d> mmk
15:34:50 <EinMByte> ok
15:35:08 <zzz> subscription protocol
15:35:28 <zzz> this is the key for crypto migration of sites
15:35:40 <EinMByte> hosts.txt replacement or what do you mean?
15:36:22 <zzz> yes this is the hosts.txt as a feed thing, with like foo.i2p=b64#sig=b64#cmd=alt ...
15:36:26 <str4d> EinMByte, amending the addressbook subscription protocol with signed key-value metadata
15:36:49 <zzz> proposal is pretty set, but on hold for 18 months or so
15:37:07 <EinMByte> Sure, although wouldn't the size of the hosts file grow too large
15:38:02 <EinMByte> Maybe add a since parameter, to exclude all hosts inserted before some given time
15:38:07 <EinMByte> (to avoid downloading the whole list even if it's not required)
15:38:22 <zzz> this was originally part of the crypto migration plan but it was hard and wasn't the most important part
15:38:49 <zzz> but it's the main thing remaining on crypto migration of signatures
15:39:26 <str4d> EinMByte, we kinda have that already with etag
15:39:28 <zzz> this is another one of those things that's proposed with a lot of specifics, but haven't quite got agreeement and so havent started
15:39:42 <EinMByte> str4d: Is it used, though?
15:39:46 <str4d> EinMByte, yes
15:40:00 <EinMByte> Oh, nvm. in that case
15:40:03 <str4d> This would be no different to the current setup
15:40:20 <zzz> so we'll on the 26 list and start on it asap. not sure if we can get far enough into it for 26 but I'll try. we need to review the thread on zzz.i2p
15:40:22 <str4d> but instead of domain name entries never repeating, they would now repeat in the "stream"
15:40:42 <EinMByte> Is there a particular reason why we need to keep the weird format, though?
15:41:05 <EinMByte> It would seem easier to me if we just used something standard
15:41:06 <zzz> maybe. compatibility with old clients. but we should review and decide for sure if that's important
15:41:20 <zzz> none have us have looked at this in maybe a year
15:41:28 <zzz> so we'll dust it off and take a looko
15:41:32 <EinMByte> zzz: Compatibily could be handled by also providing the old hosts.txt file for a while
15:41:41 <str4d> There's also the broader issue of what to do with e.g. all the "lost" names
15:41:53 <str4d> But that is outside the current discussion
15:41:57 <zzz> yup. we would also need to get the other impls involved
15:42:18 <EinMByte> str4d: I think that's something to decide on when we get a new naming system (if we ever do)
15:42:26 <str4d> For now, I want some way for currently-active domains to update their dests
15:42:26 <zzz> ok, it's staying on the list for 26 for now. next on the list - sybil stuff
15:42:45 <zzz> can we make sybil be automatic? Have you all read the philip winter paper I hope????
15:42:50 <str4d> And the sooner we get the core code in, the sooner we can turn it on in a year or so
15:43:50 <EinMByte> zzz: What paper? I missed something clearly
15:44:27 <zzz> check @__phw on twitter for link
15:45:02 <zzz> we are working with him thanks to a sadie introduction at ccc
15:45:03 <EinMByte> zzz: this: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.07787v1.pdf?
15:45:27 <zzz> if it was published in the last coulple weeks, thats it
15:45:59 <EinMByte> Well, it's an eprint from February this year
15:46:09 <zzz> i don't think we're ready for automatic. they arent really either
15:46:22 <zzz> they just spit out an email once a day to the dirauths
15:46:36 <zzz> it's all heuristic and magic on both sides
15:46:49 <EinMByte> So he probably put the eprint online after it got published
15:46:57 <zzz> so I'd like to push automatic stuff out to later in the year
15:47:07 <str4d> EinMByte, 25 Feb is the version I have
15:47:14 <EinMByte> zzz: So how exactly would that work in a decentralized setting?
15:47:44 <str4d> We need to do things from the bottom-up instead of the top-down
15:48:06 <str4d> ie. each router would need to include "potential Sybil candidates" in the peer profiles
15:48:13 <zzz> EinMByte, I don't know. it's hard
15:48:20 <str4d> based on e.g. online times etc.
15:48:30 <EinMByte> Detecting sybil attacks is doable I think, preventing them based on that detection is very hard in a decentralized network
15:48:30 <EinMByte> But I like the challenge
15:48:34 <zzz> we also need gravy who is working on a centralized redo of his setup
15:48:43 <str4d> There is also the possibility of having some kind of more centralized setup
15:48:45 <str4d> Yah, that
15:48:45 <EinMByte> str4d: At that point you need to start assigning trust to each router
15:48:52 <EinMByte> which itself would be a whole anti-sybil system
15:49:07 <str4d> And having routers subscribe to a list of potential sybils
15:49:07 <zzz> kinda like the dagon proposals
15:49:09 <str4d> EinMByte, that is basically what peer profiles are now though
15:49:31 <str4d> where "trust" is currently defined as "reliably routed well for me in the past"
15:49:42 <EinMByte> str4d: Yes, and they've caused a few attacks so far :)
15:50:15 <str4d> Yep
15:50:23 <EinMByte> Also, peer profiles don't really allow you exclude a peer from the network
15:50:31 <EinMByte> Sybil prevention would sort of allow that
15:50:35 <str4d> Peer profiling and peer selection is another of the things I think needs prioritisation
15:50:46 <str4d> EinMByte, they *can*
15:51:01 <zzz> so i propose to change the 26 sybil item to 'continued improvement' but move the 'automatic' part to later
15:51:01 <str4d> Not right now
15:51:11 <str4d> I'm just saying that is where we would put it
15:51:34 <EinMByte> str4d: Yes, that's possible.
15:51:37 <str4d> (in terms of putting Sybil detection and more advanced techniques into I2P's lexicon and architecture)
15:51:53 <EinMByte> In any case, I would not drop the decentralization. It's the nicest part of I2P imho
15:52:14 <str4d> Yep
15:52:27 <EinMByte> (and centralization also leads to various practical attacks anyway)
15:52:43 <zzz> lets move on. streaming improvements? not sure what that is, maybe just perennial 'make it better' item
15:52:49 <str4d> zzz, yep, we can continue to work on that routerconsole page, and then hook it into the peer profiles and selection once we decide on a strategy
15:53:00 <zzz> i can't think of what there is to do specifically on streaming. anybody?
15:53:01 <EinMByte> Sometimes adding a central authority can make your security proof easy, but cause security failure in practice
15:53:20 <str4d> Research and optimizations would be nice
15:53:28 <EinMByte> zzz: Any obvious improvements we could make there?
15:53:30 <str4d> That would be a good candidate for external research
15:53:46 <zzz> we really need a better test setup
15:53:51 <EinMByte> str4d: I agree.
15:53:55 <zzz> add delays / drops, reorder, etc
15:54:04 <EinMByte> We should probably extend our "open research questions" page with that and other stuff
15:54:40 <zzz> i don't have much blue sky things on my list of streaming stuff. it needs to to be test-result-driven
15:54:50 <EinMByte> There may be more improvement in the allocation of tunnels?
15:55:05 <str4d> zzz, there's some GH project that simulates "The Internet" with containers that can do that IIRC
15:55:08 <zzz> so how about we make this item be 'streaming test harness'
15:55:17 <str4d> Dunno how easy it would be tho, we would need a new JVM per container :P
15:55:25 <str4d> EinMByte, mmm
15:55:48 <EinMByte> str4d: shadow could be used, I think. Not sure if it could be integrated with Java but it's on the kovri TODO list
15:55:52 <str4d> That's not really streaming tho, that is at the datagram level
15:56:22 <zzz> the tunnel allocation thing is psi's idea to have the client pick tunnels
15:56:34 <EinMByte> str4d: Yes, I suspect there's more to optimize this
15:56:46 <EinMByte> zzz: I don't really think users are the best optimization algorithms, but maybe
15:57:10 <zzz> it's a violent corruption of our layering, and I don't see any way to do it. but that's what psi is proposing
15:57:19 <EinMByte> ... or probably "client" does not mean user
15:57:32 <zzz> client == client-side of i2cp
15:57:44 <str4d> The thing there is
15:57:54 <str4d> Tor does provide this ability via their Control Socket
15:57:58 <EinMByte> Ok so it does mean that
15:57:59 <str4d> And it is very useful for researchers
15:58:10 <str4d> But they also have a much flatter architecture
15:58:19 <str4d> Whereas we silo different clients from each other via I2CP
15:58:31 <EinMByte> zzz: I'd expect the router to have more relevant information. The client could pass any additional requirements
15:58:41 <zzz> we also have psi's lua hooks for researchers, that never got merged (either in java or kovri), but is still an option
15:59:14 <zzz> see right now the client side doesn't even know about tunnels, so it certainly doesn't have any ability to pick them
15:59:16 <str4d> Speaking to nickm at RWC, he said it was much easier for Tor to maintain a Control Socket interface than a plugin system
15:59:17 <EinMByte> I know that shadow is being used in practice by researchers
15:59:22 <EinMByte> Lua, I don't know
15:59:55 <EinMByte> zzz: So probably the same thing can be achieved by passing the relevant information over I2CP?
16:00:17 <zzz> 1mb, yes, but it would be really fugly
16:00:44 <str4d> We could always restrict it with a -research flag or something
16:00:54 <str4d> (in router.config)
16:01:06 <str4d> That way most users are not exposed to the fugly
16:01:13 <zzz> kovri/i2pd don't have those rigid API barriers between client/router yet, it's easier for the
16:01:20 <zzz> *them
16:01:28 <str4d> And we can define ".research" from the start to mean "We reserve the right to change these APIs"
16:01:44 <str4d> ie. researchers would need to use the .research flag along with a particular version
16:01:57 <str4d> Back to the actual topic of discussion:
16:01:59 <EinMByte> zzz: Re: tunnels. It depends. I think it would make sense to pass information about the intended usage of the tunnel.
16:02:20 <zzz> (FYI this meeting will go 25 more minutes max, to be continued sunday)
16:02:33 <EinMByte> zzz: It's mainly easier for us because shadow is written in C, I think
16:02:42 <str4d> I think this should be pushed into the "needs more research" category
16:02:44 <zzz> the trouble is its not just your tunnels that need to be picked but the far-end's tunnels
16:02:48 <EinMByte> Ok. Let's move on then.
16:03:08 <zzz> ok that's all that's on the 26 list now. What should be added?
16:03:11 <EinMByte> zzz: Doesn't the far-end handle that
16:03:36 <zzz> no, we source-route (i.e. pick the far-end lease out of it's leaseset for his inbound)
16:04:08 <zzz> look at the 27-29 list. what should be pulled in to 26 if anything?
16:04:44 <str4d> I want to start getting the prep work done for new LSs and the netdb
16:04:46 <zzz> here is where all the 'initial work on xxx for 2017' is, but also lots of 2016 stuff
16:05:23 <EinMByte> zzz: I misunderstood what you meant with far-end, nvm
16:05:31 <str4d> The sooner we get that settled down and into the codebase, the sooner the network will have broad support for it
16:06:42 <EinMByte> Note that we (kovri) want specifications
16:06:52 <EinMByte> Otherwise it will be hard to keep up with the implementation
16:07:31 <zzz> sure. anything that's a new specification, we need to all work on together
16:07:36 <EinMByte> str4d: Let's start by listing what LS2 should actually support
16:07:53 <EinMByte> (if that hasn't already been done)
16:09:40 <zzz> basically ls2 is only a couple of things
16:09:59 <zzz> add some space for flags
16:10:09 <zzz> and enable future crypto
16:10:52 <zzz> but i have all those proposals about better multihoming, plus grothoff-like service lookup
16:11:00 <zzz> anycast
16:11:01 <EinMByte> Do we have specific list somewhere for reference?
16:11:11 <zzz> it's pulled together on zzz, sec
16:11:23 <str4d> EinMByte, I'm slowly working on pulling all that together on the website
16:11:41 <zzz> can we make that faster str4d ? like next week or two?
16:11:47 <str4d> That should go into the .26 list
16:11:50 <str4d> Hmm
16:11:53 <str4d> Possibly
16:11:59 <str4d> I need moar eyes on it
16:11:59 <zzz> without the proposals on a simple list this is way too hard
16:12:08 <EinMByte> str4d: Great. Actually for some of these things a wiki-functionality would be useful
16:12:24 <EinMByte> (idea is that it would go faster)
16:12:48 <zzz> for starters we need a list
16:12:50 <str4d> EinMByte, exactly
16:12:56 <zzz> lets not boil the ocean here
16:13:11 <str4d> I'm trying to move from requiring backend HTML to (currently) rST
16:13:31 <str4d> I need people to look over what I have to check that a) it is usable and b) it doesn't lose anything we currently have
16:13:39 <str4d> Currently it is applied to the spec docs only
16:13:40 <zzz> let's put the proposal thing on the list for 26 and we'll talk later about what that means. But we need forward progress on it asap.
16:13:55 <str4d> But the moment that is solidified, extending it to proposals is trivial
16:13:56 <zzz> i want them on the website. i don't care what form.
16:14:46 <EinMByte> I'm willing to review proposals, but it happens sometimes that I just don't find any text
16:15:10 <EinMByte> (some things on the website are sort of hidden, I think)
16:15:37 <zzz> right
16:16:05 <zzz> we need to move stuff from zzz.i2p to the website in some sort of organization
16:16:13 <EinMByte> str4d: Moving from HTML to something which can be easility converted to various formats is a good thing
16:16:28 <EinMByte> zzz: Yes, absolutely
16:16:35 <str4d> EinMByte, what I need reviewed is in i2p.www.str4d
16:16:36 <EinMByte> Maybe a fixed process for all proposals
16:16:57 <zzz> ok. it's on the list for 26. details to follow. str4d get to work. i wouldn't expect a lot of feedback. Just come up with a new system and we will all fall in line
16:17:02 <str4d> and on http://vekw35szhzysfq7cwsly37coegsnb4rrsggy5k4wtasa6c34gy5a.b32.i2p/
16:17:04 <str4d> EinMByte, if you want to work with me on nailing that down, I could get that finished maybe by .25
16:17:23 <zzz> what else for 26? we gotta wrap this up
16:17:36 <str4d> ( EinMByte, http://vekw35szhzysfq7cwsly37coegsnb4rrsggy5k4wtasa6c34gy5a.b32.i2p/spec specifically)
16:18:14 <zzz> this is very short term stuff. I need to know what to do on monday
16:18:27 <zzz> last call for 26
16:18:41 <str4d> I think the subscriptions stuff will take a while
16:18:49 <str4d> So I'd be happy with that being the main thing
16:18:52 <zzz> agreed.
16:19:54 <zzz> ok. meeting on sunday same time. we will start with vrp/h1. please review ticket 1119 in advance. after that we will talk about 27-29, time permitting.
16:20:06 <EinMByte> str4d: Any of those that you think require most attention?
16:20:27 <zzz> we can also briefly circle back to 26 on sunday if necessary
16:20:43 <str4d> EinMByte, basically deciding whether the format for writing proposals is usable, and whether it limits what ends up on the website (in either HTML or TXT format)
16:20:45 <zzz> so agenda on sunday will be 1) vrp/h1/1119; 2) 26; 3) 27-29
16:20:57 <zzz> thanks everybody
16:21:25 * zzz *bafs* the meeting closed
16:27:50 <EinMByte> str4d: It is probably OK as long as it can be coverted to most other formats :)

9
i2p2www/meetings/logs/244.rst Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
I2P dev meeting, March 4, 2016 @ 15:00 UTC
==========================================
Quick recap
-----------
* **Present:**
i2p-devs,