Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ethereum Core Devs Meeting 55 Agenda #77

Closed
lrettig opened this issue Feb 1, 2019 · 19 comments
Closed

Ethereum Core Devs Meeting 55 Agenda #77

lrettig opened this issue Feb 1, 2019 · 19 comments
Labels
ACD Type: All Core Dev calls - execution & consensus Execution Layer: Issues that affect the execution layer

Comments

@lrettig
Copy link
Contributor

lrettig commented Feb 1, 2019

Ethereum Core Devs Meeting 55 Agenda

Agenda

  1. Roadmap
    a) Constantinople: Ropsten fork / status
    b) CREATE2 side effects for education
    c) ProgPoW Audit
    d) Reject EIP 1355 "Ethash 1a"
    e) Istanbul Hardfork Roadmap
    x Proposal Deadline May 17th
    x EIP 1418 State Rent
    x HF Naming challenge
    f) Outlook: PoS finality gadget on PoW chain (Serenity)
  2. Working Group Updates
    a) Ethereum 1.x Stanford Meetings Overview
    b) State Rent
    c) EWasm
    d) Pruning/Sync
    e) Simulation
    f) Appetite for future in person meetings?
  3. Testing Updates (time allowing)
  4. Client Updates (time allowing)
    a) Geth
    b) Parity Ethereum
    c) Aleth/eth
    d) Trinity/PyEVM
    e) EthereumJS
    f) EthereumJ/Harmony
    g) Pantheon
    h) Turbo Geth
    i) Nimbus
    j) Mana/Exthereum
    k) Mantis
  5. Research Updates (time allowing)
@MoneroCrusher

This comment has been minimized.

@hackmod

This comment has been minimized.

@MoneroCrusher

This comment has been minimized.

@ASICseer

This comment has been minimized.

@MoneroCrusher

This comment has been minimized.

@lrettig
Copy link
Contributor Author

lrettig commented Feb 2, 2019

This is not the place to debate progpow, or any other topic on the agenda. This is a meta-topic for planning the next all core devs call. Hudson, Afri and I cannot scroll through hundreds of comments looking for topics relevant to the meeting agenda. Please take this debate to https://ethereum-magicians.org, Reddit, or another forum, but not here.

I've marked these posts as off-topic and will lock this post to open commenting if it continues.

@sneg55
Copy link

sneg55 commented Feb 2, 2019

This is not the place to debate

Then what's the point of making agenda and devs calls available for the general public?

@lrettig
Copy link
Contributor Author

lrettig commented Feb 2, 2019

Core devs calls are open for public observation but they are not a forum for public debate. Other forums such as the ones I mentioned are the right place for that. We do our best to listen to and engage with the community, and to factor in concerns and community sentiment on the calls.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 3, 2019

We need a dedicated forum for ProgPoW discussion, should I start building them?

@lrettig
Copy link
Contributor Author

lrettig commented Feb 3, 2019

Check out https://gitter.im/ifdefelse/community and https://gitter.im/ethereum-mining

@ASICseer

This comment has been minimized.

@lrettig
Copy link
Contributor Author

lrettig commented Feb 5, 2019

@naikmyeong @gpushack I opened https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/on-the-progpow-audit/2594. Please post your questions there. This is not the place. The progpow audit is already on the agenda for this call.

@chfast
Copy link
Member

chfast commented Feb 6, 2019

Reject EIP-1355: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1355.

@bmann
Copy link

bmann commented Feb 8, 2019

@lrettig @Souptacular going to try again with less mining comments than my last post :)

Discussion if there is interest for a mid-April in person meeting https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eth1x-istanbul-prep-meeting/2396/2?u=boris

And more generally, what a cadence of in-person meetings looks like for other hardfork roadmap key dates. Do CoreDevs need to meet in person regularly? What topics are useful to do in person? Can I and others help with some of the planning / logistics?

@fulldecent
Copy link

It will be helpful if the agenda above could link to specific working groups. (Is there an ongoing hangout where each is discussed?)

Regarding item State Rent, the past three meeting minutes show no discussion on this. Requesting to add draft EIP 1418 to agenda if this is in scope. I believe the main speaker on this topic is @AlexeyAkhunov. Thank you.

@carver
Copy link

carver commented Feb 14, 2019

Would like to mention the CREATE2 side effects, at least to encourage everyone listening to help educate their own networks about the change.

@emansipater
Copy link

Yes, I think doing some "general education" around CREATE2 would be very helpful here, especially looking forward to some of the things that are going to be happening going forward towards 2.0 with nonces, contracts, addresses, and some of the statefulness assumptions in the CREATE patterns currently being used. I would love to join in and add some color on this if it would be useful. I think especially it's important to talk about where we want to end up on addresses, self-destructs, etc.

@Souptacular
Copy link
Contributor

Closed for #82

geovgy added a commit to geovgy/pm-1 that referenced this issue Dec 8, 2021

Verified

This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with GitHub’s verified signature. The key has expired.
Meeting notes for Consensus Layer call ethereum#77 - Issue ethereum#429
@nixorokish nixorokish added ACD Type: All Core Dev calls - execution & consensus Execution Layer: Issues that affect the execution layer labels Feb 4, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ACD Type: All Core Dev calls - execution & consensus Execution Layer: Issues that affect the execution layer
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

14 participants