Period between 2023-03-14 and 2023-04-15 inclusive
- These reports: https://github.com/rphair/cip-editing
- GitHub activity overview: https://github.com/rphair
- Cardano Forum overview: https://forum.cardano.org/u/COSDpool
- Discord invite to CIP Editors Meetings: https://discord.gg/kyaTyzkBqd
CIP pull requests @rphair involved in, by last update time = 66 in this period
CIP issues @rphair involved in, by last update time = 6 in this period
Cardano Forum CIP topics @COSDpool posted in since beginning of period = 0 addressed in this period
Open pull requests (https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pulls) = 66
Open issues (https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/issues) = 31
The number of CIPs submitted, and the rate at which they are being submitted, have both increased. The activity in the average CIP is the most it has been at any point this calendar year. With the increased workload, even with the addition of new editor Ryan Williams, the number of active PRs in this last month in the last month under my own attention has nearly doubled (from 37 to 66).
I have also nearly doubled the amount of work I perform every week, compared to last month: going over budget consistently (my Catalyst proposal was based on 8 hours per week and I have been working 12 to 16). I expect that this is a peak period but since this at least partially represents a continous geometric increase I will have to plan an increase in budget for my expected Catalyst project renewal for the 2nd year of funding (Fund 10 or 11).
I also note this because I am hoping my own Catalyst project serves to calculate a time estimate for any other "community" CIP editors that may be recruited. My own time expenditures may provide a better estimate for the total time committtment of a CIP editor than an employed editor who shares CIP editing work with other job responsibilities. As of this time my best estimate is 12 hours per week (compared to my budgeted 8 hours).
My own growing workload is also because I have been involved with every CIP, which is currently not true for any of the other editors. This month (see above) the number of open CIP requests is also 66... i.e. for last month I have triaged, commented and/or reviewed all open CIP pull requests.
Editors have privately discussed the use of performance metrics and an upcoming "meeting after" the CIP meeting in which we plan to discuss mean of work sharing (e.g. assignment using GitHub) for better cooperation & sharing workload among editors: this is for the benefit of all editors and the CIP process itself, rather than to address anyone's particular issues.
We have also had another month with only one CIP meeting due to convenor's absence again, with other editors not being able to easily switch to the convenor role. For my part, I have never disputed a meeting postponement due to the extremely poor quality of my Internet service (currently working in North India) because I cannot take over the role of screen sharing, nor can I be 100% sure that my voice will go through to Discord without interruption.
The Cardano Forum is generally not used anymore for CIPs except the ongoing and broadening Governance debate. Much of this has also moved to the new MBO groups on Matrix: while CIPs for technical specifications remain discussed exclusively on GitHub.
agenda (https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/15HCJDR-Wr-8kEhZpyVk_NszpZACyf1zAYtcSTUgLLcE)
- actual discussion not strictly following agenda: not widely distributed before meeting, prepared by editor who wasn't present, plus editors and attendees alike are caught off guard by time zone change.
- problems also related to Discord (I requested review at our upcoming planned "editors only" meeting: Sebastien not able to hear Robert even after restarting (the standard solution). We used "chat" as a back-fill as I typed my responses about each PR (hence less typing below this time):
CIP-0072? | DApp Registration & Discovery (#355)
- author & contributors present.
- related to Smart Contract Blueprints (though these aren't meant to be on-chain)
- Lace developer showed up & confirmed it's ready for implementation.
- BUT can't merge since still missing Rationale, Path to Active, Copyright, etc.
- Ryan already noted these & author still has to complete standard CIP format.
- Authors say they'll work on that.
- Seba has left comment summarising all this, including Lace wallet launch.
CIP-0001 | Add extended taxonomy (cardano-foundation/CIPs#493)
- This guy kind of elbowed his way into the agenda... I posted Matthias' rebuttal about why we don't need this proposal nor the "types" that were thrown out with the original version of the CIP process.
- It's a step backward by an author who's not really familiar with this evolution & hasn't been involved with the CIP process yet.
- Posted this summary in Discord chat but no response (still can't speak & losing Internet connection)
Authenticated Web3 HTTP Requests - discussion continues on GitHub
ERC20-like Assets - not requiring triage (extensive discussion already on GitHub)
Supercharged Native Scripts (cardano-foundation/CIPs#479) - @nielstron = Niels Mündler
- Sebastien suggested using "his" CIP-38 for this instead because it wouldn't involve changing Plutus.
- Neither he nor anyone else understands what his is really all about about.
- @matiwinnetou will ask author to attend the next meeting to introduce it & explain more about why he feels this is needed.
- Seba characterises this as a "design pattern" for scripts.
- interested in author's description of why this doesn't require changes to ledger
- later in the meeting the author arrives, saying:
- Sebastien is drawing out a good description of how this would be used in practice.
- From a web design perspective it does sound like a "design pattern" as term is employed in web design.
- RESOLUTION it's a work in progress & proceeding well enough on GitHub (including refuting with alternatives & competing methods... author has invited these from attendees)
- I invited MPJ to review it, but people are already offering simpler alternatives.
(CPS) Voltaire Governance
- Originally posted as a CIP which had to be closed, after getting a huge amount of feedback from community... author is still catching up & not much to do with it at this meeting.
Extend Token Metadata for translations
- Problem: they extended the JSON notation instead of the CDDL notation.
- Also one of the devs thinks it will work better with "locale" instead of language tags.
- (authors still haven't responded to this particular reservation)
(CPS) Properly burning NFT/Tokens
- Recent comment on GitHub suggests a different way of dealing with this.
- No CIP for it yet so no hurry to push this one forward.
CPS-0001 | Metadata discoverability and trust - ongoing technical review
CPS-0002 | Pointer addresses - insufficient time on agenda
CPS-0003 | Smart Tokens
- It's a "container" for other CPSs including the "rejected" CIP70.
- Discussion is still continuing on this.
CPS-0004 | Spending Script Redundant Execution
- No Plutus representatives present so can't really talk about this one further.
CIP-0057? | Plutus smart-contract blueprints - still under discussion.