diff --git a/i2p2www/meetings/logs/245.log b/i2p2www/meetings/logs/245.log new file mode 100644 index 00000000..a5647ba3 --- /dev/null +++ b/i2p2www/meetings/logs/245.log @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ + 1) VRP/H1/1119 + 2) 0.9.26 carryover + 3) Summer of X + 4) 27-29 deferred to next meeting + 0) hi + hi + hi + I'll explain 3) when we get there + Hi + 1) VRP/H1/1119 + http://trac.i2p2.i2p/ticket/1119 + has everybody had a chance to catch up and review this ticket? +* str4d is about to post his comments + str4d overall thoughts? + Overall I think it is pretty good. I like the positive feedback we have had from people who do this kind of thing for a living :) + I think we're on the right track more or less + this ticket has been around for 2 years. you brought up H1 14 months ago. we've had anonimal's vrp process drafts since september + i think over that time, h1 has become pretty legit + I agree with zzz that the later points are overspecified, but I think the process and response sections (sections III and IV) are about the right level of specification + i have no remaining doubts about using h1 + Yes, although I've only followed the discussion from a distance, vuln. response should follow stricter procedures then now. H1 might be a good options for that. + s/options/option + I am also +1 on h1, for the reasons I have already outlined in the ticket. + str4d, you met katie of h1 a while back right? can you fill us in on that meeting? + Hi + Yeah! I met her at Kiwicon 9 + I asked her about the tweet I posted, that arice responded to in the ticket + Turns out that arice actually emailed her a link to our ticket asking if his response was adequate, and she ended up reviewing the ticket on her phone while in another meeting :P + She also liked it :P + and what about the funded stuff and what tor's doing with them? + She mentioned that it was going to happen, and did indicate that we may be able to get in the same program + also, overall impressions of h1 the company after meeting katie? + I have yet to follow up on this, because 1) thesis, and 2) there is no point in going in any program if we don't then use h1 + zzz, very positive + anybody have any objections to using h1? + They appear to know their stuff, and Katie is certainly thriving there + can we flip the switch on h1 now to go live or what has to happen first? + If we go for h1, this is what I think needs to happen: + - We finish up the VRP and get it on the website + - We tidy up the copy text front page of the h1 page + (things like how we respond, what we consider in-scope etc.) + vrp must be before h1 live? + - We decide on the response team + - We move the sandbox into closed beta, where we have a few researchers invited + - Once we have had some time to get used to the platform, response volumes etc. we take it to open + you really think responses are going to start rolling in the day we flip the switch? + They could + Katie indicated to me there were a number of researchers who were very interested in helping open-source projects, if they could find them + can't imagine we need to have everything lined up. not like the researchers are going to start hacking on day one + especially if no money involved + closed beta means they have to let the in? + Yes + Essentially h1 invites maybe 10 researchers to be able to use our page + Do you have any idea who would be invited? + so putting the VRP and our response team aside for the moment, who's going to fix up our h1 page to get ready? str4d? + I don't recall the exact specifics + (whether we invite people ourselves through h1 or whether they find the researchers from the existing registered pool) + The idea is that then we don't get inundated with crappy tickets before getting used to how to respond to them + But IMHO it also helps us start to directly build relationships with a few researchers + do you have a sense of whether everybody is chasing after bounties on h1 or are the free ones getting a lot of reports too? + Sure, or at least with those that are using h1 + I don't personally have a sense of that + zzz: Is there a possibility of eventually oferring bounties? + But Katie indicated that there were definitely researchers who wanted to help FOSS projects if they could identify them + somebody is funding tor bounties now, so yes + I can help str4d on the h1 mainpage + thx sadie + I2P has reasonable savings, why not spend some of them on bounties + ok great, so sadie and str4d will work on getting the h1 side ready + EinMByte, yes we could go to bounties, but not initially IMHO + 1mb we certainly can if we want + anything else on h1 or can we move onto the vrp itself? + Let's see how it works out without bounties + And as mentioned above, there is now a program on h1 for funding bounties for FOSS projects + Beta sounds like a good opportunity for team to develop public facing responses for if a really serious bug is publically disclosed + which we may be able to get into + last call for h1 + ok, lets look at the vrp itself in the ticket +* str4d posts his comments + we're reviewing anonimal's draft from november + let's not go thru point by point though + overall impressions on the november draft and where we go from here? + I agree with zzz that the later points are overspecified, but I think the process and response sections (sections III and IV) are about the right level of specification +* zzz takes a minute to read str4d's comments + ok it seems like we are in general agreement that the november draft is a great start and we have rough agreements on the edits necessary + what I'd like to do is take the final stage of this from anonimal, that str4d and I will finish the edits and get it posted on the website, and round up a team + Sounds good + what do you guys think? + There are also the necessary tweaks now we are going for h1 instead of private Trac + any volunteers to help us work on the final version? + we don't want to get overly tool-specific (mtn, h1, etc) in the process. It should be high level enough to avoid most of that + True + And we will be iterating on it anyway + doesnt need to be perfect out of the gate + That is another reason for a private beta initially + ok str4d when are we going to have that done by? + vrp draft looks good + end of march? + sounds good + ok anything else on 1) ?? + moving on to 2) 0.9.26 revisited + any other comments? unfortunately I haven't updated the roadmap on the website yet + so i could hold up my notes to the camera + sorry i should have done the website. + I did get the last 3 meeting logs, including last thurs and fri., up on the website though + guess i will be doing that until kytv reappears + whenever our next meeting is, I will put .26 on the agenda to look at it then + anything else on 2) ? + ok moving on to 3) summer of x + str4d can you explain our idea please + The idea is that we focus development for three months on user- and developer-facing elements of I2P + ie. things that people might actually care about, rather than streaming tweaks ;P + And therefore things that are easier to do publicity on + The rough idea is: + - Summer of APIs: spend a month working on updating our libraries etc + - Summer of Apps: spend a month working on helping other projects use those libraries + - Summer of Plugins: spend a month working on our own apps and plugins + right, this is about growing the network through outreach and making apps (ours and other people's) better + Yep + my idea was, if we can get 5 more Vuze's, we'll be 5 times bigger + You might also want to add documentation to that + Plus there's the whole Summer of Code ethos that we can hook into online + no good API without decent documentation + a lot of times we see some project thinking about i2p but they dont know much and dont get any help + EinMByte, to the API parts, yes + agreed 1mb + ie. that would be on making our libraries and APIs as easy for devs to use as possible + Sounds like a good campaign idea! Worth a shot + so e.g. updating txi2p, libsam etc. with SAMv3.3 + Supporting more languages? + More interfacing through existing libraries + Potentially, if we have the developers to help :) + EinMByte, yah + I'd like to sadie involved in this too with branding and outreach + I think str4d's work with twisted is great, would be nice to do more stuff like that + Fix the libtorrent support, try and get something into libp2p, etc. + summer of i2p, or i2p summer of fun, etc + i;e. do not write our own API from scratch but offer plugins for whatever framework people are using + EinMByte, exactly. + pushing sam 3.3, bringing all the various bridge libs up to date, documented, etc + Or if we do offer our own API, make it as simple as possible. That's what I like about libsam, it is two files that any project can bundle (or ideally, any existing library) + there's python and go and c and c++ and twisted and libtorrent and libsockets and and and... + we fix up other people's stuff and do pull requests to them + str4d: Agreed, APIs should be easy to bundle. It's a common problem for me + While that is ongoing, we can ask other projects if they want help getting I2P into their apps + why the heck doesn't libtorrent work? who can figure that out and get it fixed? + ^^ as an example + Then in the next phase of SoX, we then work on educating them and helping them use the newly-updated libraries and APIs + sounds good + It would be great to have buy-in with this from i2pd and kovri too, at least for the API part + since we want to end up with apps being able to use whatever I2P backend they want + i think we could get a lot of people excited here. I know psi is working on various libs + we need a list of all the messaging apps we want to target + And this is good for tying in with our existing outreach + If we get the right PR it might be a success + I want to create a simple C++ API for kovri, at some point + great 1mb + Then that API could be used from various programming languages. But this is a core API, not a client API (so use-case is somewhat different) + Pretty much it should allow any application to bundle the kovri core. + this would be a nice wholistic project to get everybody involved + Agreed + In my outreach todo list I have Tahoe-LAFS, IPFS, Tox, OpenBazaar, Zeronet... + ok how do we move forward with this + maybe sadie can give it a cool name + We essentially have until the end of May to plan this + (while .25 and .26 are released) + so after .26 + lets put this on the april 4 meeting agenda + Ok. + PR would have to attend, though + june: APIs july: apps aug: plugins + (so I think that's sadie, now?) + also could wrap this around HOPE + I don't know many of the details obviously yet, but I'm not a terrible tech writer if anyone wants to assign me some grunt work + ok let's ask sadie to flesh this out a little on april 4 + zzz - I can take care of graphics/ content with str4d for outreach + ok + anything else on summer of x? + also, I will at Hope with stickers .. + Nothing from me :) + Call it something other than Summer of X so it doesn't sound either non-descript, or like porn? + amnesia, X is a placeholder + (until we think of something better) + ok. as I said at the top of the meeting, I'd like to defer discussion of 27-29 and the bigger roadmap and goals for 2nd half '16 + Summer of Targetted Development? + do we like these roadmap-specific meetings or not? should we do this again? + amnesia, a little long IMHO + We will think of something for the April meeting + send your ideas for 'X' to sadie or post somewhere + zzz, I like them + And speaking of + do we want another roadmap mtg in march? + zzz , can we put something on forum where people can leave suggestions for the "summer of" name? + yes sadie + The other thing I wanted to bring up was the longer-term roadmapping + zzz: Yes. We need more long-term + we got our .25 release next weekend so that will keep us occupied + maybe about 2 weeks from now for another roadmap meeting + Unless we plan that for later, but at some point it will need discussion + Sounds good + zzz: I think they're good. Keeps focus + I want to suggest something for people to mull over + zzz: sure + want to go back to a tuesday 8 PM or do it on the weekend? + In parallel with the SoX, I would like to have another two parallel streams of development work + - Crypto migration + - UI overhaul + The blocker on both of these is research and design, not implementatino + Does crypto migration include NTCP2? + Yes + So while we are doing SoX implementation stuff, we are also doing reviews of the various proposals etc. + how is saturday March 19th + +1 Weekends + 8 PM UTC Saturday March 19 + With a goal of having a plan ready to implement either during or after SoX + March 19 seems good + Likewise with UI, we need to start planning design work on that ASAP, because it will take a long time + march 19th works for me + ok sox == summer of x, got it + Yes (until we change it :P ) + Design stuff can happen in parallel with everything else, and then implementation could happen after SoX + It would be *so* nice if we could have a new UI in place for CCC + ok I will get an agenda up on zzz.i2p, plus the notes, plus the logs from todays meeting on the website + Anyway, stuff to think about + anything else for today's meeting? +* zzz grabs the baffer + We can discuss more at next roadmap + baff it + March 19 works for me :) +* zzz *baffs* it + thanks everybody diff --git a/i2p2www/meetings/logs/245.rst b/i2p2www/meetings/logs/245.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..b754f6dc --- /dev/null +++ b/i2p2www/meetings/logs/245.rst @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +I2P dev meeting, March 6, 2016 @ 15:00 UTC +========================================== + +Quick recap +----------- + +* **Present:** + +EinMByte, +sadie, +str4d, +z3r0fox, +zzz