<div dir="auto">Hey Rusty,<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">No matter how we agree for the process I suggest to create a wiki page on which we make it transparent and link to it from README.md. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The current process was new to me and I think one cannot expect newcomers to read through the entire Mailinglist.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As soon as we have an agreement I can create this PR together with more useful information for newcomers. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Best regards Rene</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">Am Di., 27. Nov. 2018, 01:13 hat Matt Corallo <<a href="mailto:lf-lists@mattcorallo.com">lf-lists@mattcorallo.com</a>> geschrieben:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">+100 for IRC meetings, though, really, I'd much much stronger prefer substantive discussion happen on GitHub or the mailing list. Doing finalization in a live meeting is really unfair to those who can't find the time to attend regularly (or happen to miss the one where that thing was discussed that they care about).<br>
<br>
> On Nov 26, 2018, at 18:29, Rusty Russell <<a href="mailto:rusty@rustcorp.com.au" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rusty@rustcorp.com.au</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Hi all,<br>
> <br>
> As you may know, for 1.0 spec we had a biweekly Google Hangout,<br>
> at 5:30am Adelaide time (Monday 19:00 UTC, or 20:00 UTC Q3/4). You can<br>
> see the minutes of all meetings here:<br>
> <br>
> <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oU4wxzGsYd0T084rTXJbedb7Gvdtj4ax638nMkYUmco" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oU4wxzGsYd0T084rTXJbedb7Gvdtj4ax638nMkYUmco</a><br>
> <br>
> The current process rules are:<br>
> <br>
> 1. Any substantive spec change requires unanimous approval at the<br>
> meeting before application.<br>
> 2. Any implementation changes generally require two interoperable<br>
> implementations before they are considered final.<br>
> 3. "typo, formatting and spelling" fixes which can be applied after two<br>
> acks without a meeting necessary.<br>
> <br>
> It's time to revisit this as we approach 1.1:<br>
> <br>
> 1. Should we move to an IRC meeting? Bitcoin development does this.<br>
> It's more inclusive, and better recorded. But it can be<br>
> lower-bandwidth.<br>
> <br>
> 2. Should we have a more formal approval method for PRs, eg. a<br>
> "CONSENSUS:YES" tag we apply once we have acks from two teams and no<br>
> Naks, then a meeting to review consensus, followed by "FINAL" tag and<br>
> commit the next meeting? That gives you at least two weeks to<br>
> comment on the final draft.<br>
> <br>
> Side note: I've added milestones to PRs as 1.0/1.1; I'm hoping to clear<br>
> all 1.0 PRs this week for tagging in the next meeting, then we can start<br>
> on 1.1 commits.<br>
> <br>
> Thanks!<br>
> Rusty.<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Lightning-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lightning-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>