Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
79 lines (54 loc) · 6.02 KB

20190813-meeting-governance.md

File metadata and controls

79 lines (54 loc) · 6.02 KB
Raw

Meeting Notes: Governance, Aug 13 2019

Governance meeting held Aug 13 2019 @ 3PM UTC in grin/Lobby on Gitter, full chat transcript here. Meeting lasted ~ 55 min.

Notes are truncated, and conversations sorted based on topic and not always chronological. Quotes are edited for brevity and clarity, and not always exact.

Community attendance:

  • antiochp
  • hashmap
  • jaspervdm
  • coolman_kurt_twitter
  • j01tz
  • nijynot
  • tromp
  • yeastplume

(apologies if I missed someone - open a PR or contact @lehnberg to add)

Agenda points & Actions

1. Agenda review

Proposed agenda accepted.

2. Action point follow ups from previous meetings

2.1 Site redesign

  • nijynot: Have updated the design, and added 3 pages, here's the link. There's also a page for community projects now, so we might want to think about how we present wallets/other apps. Implementing on our current site should not be too hard. I can start working on it soon, a bit busy in the coming weeks, so probably not done for the next gov meeting.
    • yeastplume: Nice, that looks really good. No problem or pressure, thanks for putting together what you have.

2.2 Funding transparency report II

No update

2.3 Grin donation address

Actioned and private seed backed up.

2.4 ETH donation address

No update

3. Funding status

3.1 Grin Donation

  • yeastplume: We've had a healthy Grin donation from Sparkpool, who've pledged to send on similar amounts every month, and we really appreciate that.
    • jaspervdm: We should update the income log and add it.

3.2 Yeastplume campaign

  • yeastplume: I haven't started a campaign, and I'm still not sure whether it's a good idea at this point. I'm heavily leaning towards it being too confusing and worried about being in a situation where I'm continually explaining why I'm still looking for funds when we have the guts of a million sitting there un-earmarked. So leaning towards just asking council for yeastunits in 3-month intervals. Would really appreciate any other thoughts on the subject.
    • j01tz: The main reasoning against running a campaign for your funding is confusion? Wouldn't it make sense to run funding campaigns as long as people are still willing to fund? This way we aren't drawing on general fund unless absolutely necessary. Though some might have different philosophy on spend vs save amounts for general fund.
    • jaspervdm: I have mixed feelings on it, as your campaigns have been successful in the past, so it would be a good way to mobilize people to donate. but I understand the possibility for confusion as well. Maybe we should spend more effort on fundraising in general.
    • antiochp: Maybe worth decoupling the fund raising from fund spending - @yeastplume asks for funds from general fund but we run a campaign in parallel aiming to replenish it? But I do wonder if we want to actually see evidence of confusion or resistance from the wider community first?
    • j01tz: Yes i think there could be some more organization there (hopefully fundraising sub-team fills that eventually). also maybe defining some goals/priorities, like is growth or survival more important etc.
    • yeastplume: Confusion isn't the main reason, but when funds were going into the yeastfunds there was no other fund and thus way to support Grin's development. I don't think people wanted to donate to me personally, but wanted to see funds for Grin's continued development. There's a continual avenue for that and it seems unnecessarily confusing to split it. Also, remember the last campaign completely stalled until Igno sent out a bit of a nastygram, but some donating parties were confused as they thought they were supporting us via the general fund.
    • coolman kurt twitter: For what it’s worth, to me it makes more sense to use the general fund for Yeastplume. It is healthy to intelligently use money in general and in any community / organisation (I think) and to show people that we use the money for good purpose (and it is a good purpose here!), and do not sit on it for too long periods of time.
    • yeastplume: Thanks, appreciate feedback all. Going to decide on this over the next couple of days, I think @antiochp's idea make sense as well to focus efforts instead in drawing more attention to the general fund.
    • antiochp: Yeah - maybe a good opportunity to show what we are using funds for (i.e. spending it on actual yeastunits) and then potentially use that to push for a fund raise to stay replenished?
    • j01tz: That makes sense to me. 👍

4. RFC & sub-teams update

  • yeastplume: I believe we have 2 RFCs that are ready for merging?

    We also have a long-awaited and highly-anticipated RFC on relative kernel locks: mimblewimble/grin-rfcs#19 which is definitely worth paying attention to as it has an impact on many future enhancements.

5. Security

  • j01tz: The security audit status has continued to progress nicely since last meeting. Currently I'm coordinating with the auditor to produce a completed remediation report within the week. Hopefully by the next gov meeting we can have feedback from them and move on to publishing the findings. But of course there may be some back and forth and we want to make sure everything has time to be adequately addressed.
    • antiochp: Excellent.
    • yeastplume: Great, again thanks for your continued work on this.

6. Other questions

None.

Meeting adjourned.