Simon Dudley: Hello.
Jason Frame: Hello!
Simon Dudley: It's about a few minutes to
Simon Dudley: to the right.
Simon Dudley: Hi! Summon.
Sally MacFarlane: Hello!
Simon Dudley: I think we might be expecting Gary, but not done it.
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah, Just so, Dennis message that he probably wasn't gonna make it.
Sally MacFarlane: We have a pretty packed agenda.
Simon Dudley: Yeah, there's quite a lot to cover.
Jason Frame: Yeah, it's good.
Simon Dudley: Hi, Jenny!
Zhenyang Shi: Hello!
Simon Dudley: Just give Gary in a minute.
Simon Dudley: Okay, I think i'm going to stop.
Simon Dudley: So this is the gender.
Simon Dudley: Let me know if you can't see this.
Sally MacFarlane: it's a bit small.
Simon Dudley: How's that?
Sally MacFarlane: That's better? Yeah, that's
Simon Dudley: cool. So
Simon Dudley: this is a but you said my contribut to call sp of housekeeping to start.
Simon Dudley: there's an anti-trust notice. Please read it and abide by it.
Simon Dudley: this meeting is being recorded.
Simon Dudley: and
yes.
Simon Dudley: that's good enough. I can't see car yet, but let's stop. Is there any general announcements
Simon Dudley: release updates
Simon Dudley: 22.10 point 1 which I think was
Simon Dudley: a normal dot release. But it was maybe slightly delayed.
Simon Dudley: because of the no issue on the main bunch.
Simon Dudley: then, and maybe she cropped up after the release, so that was in swift
Simon Dudley: half fixed with 22.10 to a day or 2 later. I think
Simon Dudley: Does anyone want to speak to either of these.
Sally MacFarlane: No, I think I think you summarized it. Well, i'm not sure
Sally MacFarlane: like just as you're facilitating someone. I'm taking a step back. I'm. I'm. Not sure what the purpose of this section is. Is it just to summarize releases that have happened, or should we
have specific
Sally MacFarlane: objectives that we want to talk about there, or is it just a summary?
Simon Dudley: Yeah, it's a good question. I'm not sure.
Simon Dudley: I guess it might spot
Simon Dudley: specific discussion about
Simon Dudley: things up in the release, but I think probably
Simon Dudley: all of us on the call at least know about it, and I think it was discussed on
Simon Dudley: I see
Simon Dudley: on the discount channels as well. So to have an office. Probably all the discussions on there.
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah, yeah, exactly. And I guess the next upcoming release would be 22 tenth already, which should be
Sally MacFarlane: plan for next week.
Simon Dudley: Yes, next Wednesday.
Yeah.
Jason Frame: Yeah. I think we often use this to talk about the upcoming release, and I think it might be
Jason Frame: needed for that device
Jason Frame: as much they want.
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Sally MacFarlane: Oh, so we don't have anyone on the Rel Rotations page for that release.
Sally MacFarlane: That's it.
Sally MacFarlane: The call for volunteers I yet
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Simon Dudley: and I
Simon Dudley: it's called as well.
Simon Dudley: So the next. Anything more about the release, or should I move on to the next section?
Simon Dudley: They all
Simon Dudley: So yeah, work updates. we've got Shanghai
Simon Dudley: there's a planning document. that's on your place with.
Simon Dudley: Sorry I
Simon Dudley: I think it's mostly up to date. it might be a few things. I'm not sure about the laundry this things, but I think everything in the shortlist is up to date.
Simon Dudley: And then I just gave an update on the
Simon Dudley: this cool channel about
Simon Dudley: he's aiming to do so, that this Pr. Is the small era, and he's aiming to do big the Us.
Simon Dudley: By getting to My, I think, he said, this week end of this for you.
Simon Dudley: So I put modes in its mouth.
you
Gary Schulte: quick question.
Gary Schulte: Okay, does it?
Gary Schulte: It's big. Ef: preclude small. I like what we have to make code changes not to only support small you.
Simon Dudley: Okay, Bye.
Simon Dudley: To be honest, I don't know much about it.
Simon Dudley: But the reason I was linked to this document. So maybe that i'll explain
Simon Dudley: what the plan is.
Simon Dudley: but yeah, he was saying.
Simon Dudley: he's targeting basically main branch being complete for the launch of the death net next week.
Simon Dudley: Not sure exactly which state that's plum for. But i'm guessing it might be a bit fluid.
Simon Dudley: But yeah, I think all the other aviation things are in main already.
Simon Dudley: withdrawals is in progress. This is linking to the epic with a few different issues in touch now. And
Simon Dudley: 4, 8, 4, 4 is in progress as well.
Simon Dudley: So yeah that's the planning document. The we still talked about the
Simon Dudley: with withdrawals. so one of the
Simon Dudley: one of the Pr. That's come out that is the addition of the Shanghai timestamp, and and the ability to support that. That's pretty close to
Simon Dudley: Then you may
Simon Dudley: and
Simon Dudley: I expect that will be in this week.
Simon Dudley: and then we'll be able to pull that code into the other withdrawals here. and try and get that across into Main as well. at least starting this week as well
Simon Dudley: separately. This
Simon Dudley: some work to get there's a hive test draft of the withdrawals.
Simon Dudley: Some tests for the withdrawals. It's it's very much a draft. It's being added to
Simon Dudley: i'm not sure how much we should rely on
Simon Dudley: on the test, because you know, things are still changing as people into
Simon Dudley: but it's giving us some early indication of the potential bugs.
Simon Dudley: One question I had around that was
Simon Dudley: because since we're changing the engine api as part of withdrawals
Simon Dudley: is
Simon Dudley: like.
Simon Dudley: Can we rely on the the engine? Api? 5 tests that are existing as a regression
Simon Dudley: or
Simon Dudley: So take notice
Simon Dudley: we're not passing everything. This this there's also 2 5 tests.
Simon Dudley: Got it
Simon Dudley: What? I'm too.
Simon Dudley: but high test to seem to be
Simon Dudley: the engine api things.
Simon Dudley: and say
Simon Dudley: it looks like they might be failing
Simon Dudley: a few of them.
Simon Dudley: so I don't know if there is a plan to get those passing that's going on separately
Simon Dudley: is I know what I
Sally MacFarlane: my team team revenue. We've been looking at the Rpc. And I've seen compat
Sally MacFarlane: test suites
Sally MacFarlane: because they said that he was there. But that's they're different to me into one.
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Sally MacFarlane: And and the families that are mostly around it. Edge cases in their handling.
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Sally MacFarlane: I I guess we could expand the as well to look at the engine. api test suite
Sally MacFarlane: as well.
Simon Dudley: Possibly it seems like we should. Probably
Simon Dudley: I need to pass them all. But obviously that's much of
Simon Dudley: prioritization. I guess it. Does anyone disagree that we should AIM to to have them over hive test, passing
Sally MacFarlane: The the only reservation there that I have is that
Sally MacFarlane: it always seems to be comparative
Sally MacFarlane: all of the clients to get, and in some cases with the
Sally MacFarlane: come to the conclusion that
Sally MacFarlane: you know, but basis doing the right thing, and and guess should change what what they're doing in some cases.
Simon Dudley: right?
Sally MacFarlane: So. So I guess we don't just want to, bluntly, you know, make on the test screen.
Sally MacFarlane: I think critically about what? What? I
Simon Dudley: Yeah.
Simon Dudley: Yeah, that's funny. I i'm wondering if that could be the case for the withdrawals host as well. That is, maybe been based on one client's implementation. It was early on.
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah, and in in some cases as well, there's been, you know, he has pushed to the hard test repo itself to Change the way that
that
Jason Frame: hive test, for the withdrawal is very much for our being worked on. So I think we have to be careful, taking
Jason Frame: what tests are they on there at the moment.
Yeah.
Simon Dudley: yeah. So my my concern is around with regressing
Simon Dudley: the the withdrawals changes regressing the existing engine. Api.
Simon Dudley: Yes, yeah, same. But we she's
Simon Dudley: we should maybe have a go at it.
Simon Dudley: So we've got confidence in that.
Simon Dudley: Anything else on withdrawals, or I've test you know what I want to discuss.
Simon Dudley: Okay, so 4, 8, 4, 4
Simon Dudley: So it has been like one or 2 just started
Simon Dudley: so things are being kind of funded and and and picked out for this and the plan is to get
Simon Dudley: multiple of this working in parallel on this
Simon Dudley: and as a result we would
Simon Dudley: talking about, maybe having a
Simon Dudley: a channel to discuss it specifically.
Simon Dudley: and we're thinking maybe we could.
Simon Dudley: Yeah.
Simon Dudley: if people agree it would be a good place to do it would be on the Hyper ledger. Discord maybe create a channel there, or use one of the existing channels
Simon Dudley: not clear yet how not it might get, but it would be very specific to the 4
Simon Dudley: implementation in basic.
Simon Dudley: that possibly could be a useful thing to have
Simon Dudley: public like that, so that
Simon Dudley: you know people that might be attending get involved with the interrupt session.
Simon Dudley: might be able to
Simon Dudley: see what's going on? Have questions and things like that.
Simon Dudley: How do you feel? It's on that?
Jason Frame: what do we need a discount for this er but not the others.
because
Simon Dudley: it's gonna possibly involve quite a few people working in parallel.
Jason Frame: Yeah, we might be able to.
Jason Frame: Yeah, I I i'm not.
Jason Frame: But I think we necessarily need a separate channel right now. But
Simon Dudley: okay, well, I guess it makes sense to any great one if we actually need it rather than create one first.
Simon Dudley: so we can probably use an existing tunnel, and then
Simon Dudley: if it gets to noise and decides to create a set for Well.
Jason Frame: yeah, I I think that makes sense like if we get to noisy in the previous channel somewhere, we can move it out.
Jason Frame: so we
Jason Frame: I can check what to do that
Simon Dudley: that is
Simon Dudley: So this item here is sorry. Was there anything else about? All right?
Jason Frame: i'm pilot. I'm planning to pick up a a pace of that the champion for that to look at the transaction, and fairly fully
Jason Frame: before I
Jason Frame: But there's a lot of cases that are up for grabs.
Jason Frame: on that ticket that was mentioned.
Simon Dudley: Yeah, so that that ticket I guess it's like the epic for 4, 4 4 is is listed. Yeah.
Simon Dudley: and i'm almost to the
Simon Dudley: It's didn't sign up finding talking.
Simon Dudley: and it's
Sally MacFarlane: it, was that, an ask for a people to
Sally MacFarlane: take out pieces of that, or is it sort of all pointed out and under control?
Simon Dudley: That's a good question.
Simon Dudley: I think there are things
Simon Dudley: that the reg to be picked up on
Simon Dudley: or like we'll, they will be soon.
Simon Dudley: not quite clear yet.
Simon Dudley: He's working on what? Because I think people are finishing some things. They're in progress first.
Simon Dudley: but it's yeah, it's definitely a discussion we can have with people that
Simon Dudley: 3. i'm gonna get involved.
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah, I guess that that
Sally MacFarlane: conversation can happen and just go to, you know, if the specific options are out for Grab. So
Sally MacFarlane: you're looking to help.
Simon Dudley: I think that makes sense. I think the idea is to you know. Keep that treat that links issue as a kind of epic and
Simon Dudley: split up Pr. Or issues from it. As people are picking things up.
Simon Dudley: so it should hopefully be clear. Well, what is it isn't being done?
Gary Schulte: Would it make sense to start a 4, 8, 4, 4 thread on basic contributors, so it could keep that conversation kind of tight and tidy.
Simon Dudley: Yeah, we can start that as a threat. Yeah. In instead of a channel, then.
Simon Dudley: yeah.
Simon Dudley: I I it may be slightly too early. I'm not sure if this anyone other than nearing looking at it at the moment. But
Simon Dudley: So we I think by next week it probably will be.
Jason Frame: I don't think it's much happening at the moment. But yeah, I think that's right. Makes a lot of sense. we can.
Jason Frame: Few of us did.
Jason Frame: So. We'll plan to become Some cases it' be good to discuss that there?
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Simon Dudley: So I think on the last
Simon Dudley: for this. it was mentioned that
Simon Dudley: the client team should get a
Simon Dudley: kind of like finalized list of aip that we'd be happy to include alongside withdrawals in Shanghai
Simon Dudley: so I I mentioned that here I don't know if we're
Simon Dudley: April 2
Simon Dudley: finalize that list right now. But I wanted to bring it up
Simon Dudley: because we should probably start thinking about this week, I think. Yeah, all code is this week isn't it?
Simon Dudley: I suspect it's going to be very similar to this list. I'm not sure whether the
Simon Dudley: any of the items from the laundry list would be
Simon Dudley: included as well. I I guess
Simon Dudley: if it's complete, I guess there's no harm in the same
Simon Dudley: it could be in there. But there might be other issues i'm not aware of why it shouldn't be in that. But
Simon Dudley: yeah, if anyone's got any thoughts on that.
Simon Dudley: It wants to discuss here
Jason Frame: what happens If
Jason Frame: they
Jason Frame: what goes into the icd changes.
Jason Frame: what? What? What's going to shake? My rather
Jason Frame: How about you? And I have to
Jason Frame: pile up on to get that. Get those?
Simon Dudley: I I guess what we need to do is
Simon Dudley: states our case for what we think should be included, and what we got ready.
Simon Dudley: and maybe highlight anything we haven't got ready to be included in that
Simon Dudley: that feels like it would be a decision made in all.
Simon Dudley: but yeah, are you saying if if a decision was made in all that that
Simon Dudley: meant that we had to get something, and it wasn't ready what we do. That
Jason Frame: I was. But yeah. So I think if we have the discussion on this code,
Jason Frame: I guess. after the meeting.
Jason Frame: if that happens. And
Jason Frame: but you've got a good point there. I've got representation of this If the is there anyone from
Jason Frame: the basic teams come about to represent? They say that they call to make sure we get let them know what our status is, and what we're happy to go in.
Jason Frame: Really check on.
Gary Schulte: I know Dana has put forth a position at some point, and she but typically has, like the Wednesday prior to for us a Thursday, the All Court does, and the Wednesday Prior.
Gary Schulte: There's a kind of everybody on Tupa gets together. I Usually it's usually too early for me to join, so it might actually be Australia time zone. Friendly
Gary Schulte: But that's where a lot of the discussion and, like consensus, is built about what the team position is going to be ahead of that. So
Gary Schulte: maybe we could make sure that we can get everybody that's involved in Shanghai in that
Gary Schulte: that is usually the Eip Study group is the me. But
Gary Schulte: maybe there's a way I don't know if we could do that asynchronously to arrive with that consensus
Gary Schulte: on discord. But
Gary Schulte: a meeting might actually be more effective
Gary Schulte: if we can get time zones to work out
Simon Dudley: I was. I was planning on starting. If I don't discord about it a bit closer to the time.
Simon Dudley: but yeah, maybe that can turn into a
Simon Dudley: but yeah, it feels like we should probably come to some sort of consensus about the list of the ips.
Gary Schulte: yeah, there's
Gary Schulte: It's not a lot of time left. So
Gary Schulte: ahead and
Gary Schulte: ahead of the call this week.
Simon Dudley: So
Simon Dudley: okay. Anything else on
Simon Dudley: We've also got Ci on here.
Simon Dudley: not sure if anyone if that was carried out, or someone as I did that to discuss. But
Gary Schulte: i'm on Mobile so I can't tell who's here to Justin on the call.
Gary Schulte: Okay, I can kind of represent the status he's got with the Github actions this morning. He said that
Gary Schulte: everything except one of the Pk.
Simon Dudley: Oh.
Simon Dudley: or at least I can't hear you
Simon Dudley: and anyone else here.
Sally MacFarlane: No, I think we listen. I did see an update from Justin about. There was a
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah, that was a specific test with Pki, I mean something that was consistently filing and github options, even though it was
okay.
Simon Dudley: Oh, yeah.
Sally MacFarlane: but yeah, I think it's the the web is progressing. Well, in general. there's just a few hurdles together.
Simon Dudley: Hi guys back. Hello!
Simon Dudley: So I can't hear you if you're speaking
Simon Dudley: Did anyone else want to mention anything about the Ci?
Simon Dudley: Thanks for that.
Simon Dudley: Okay, let's move on to our business. We can circle back to that very. We joined
Simon Dudley: Yes. So the next
Simon Dudley: one of these meetings a pack time
Simon Dudley: he schedules for third in January.
Simon Dudley: second of January and us.
Simon Dudley: if there's no religion issues
Simon Dudley: someone's proposing to be skipped.
Simon Dudley: Gt.
Simon Dudley: Thanks being on a right
Simon Dudley: Any objection to that on this call.
Gary Schulte: Sorry I understand.
Sally MacFarlane: I I propose that skipping the next
Sally MacFarlane: just after that years did I go? Commented in disc that he wouldn't be back from money
Sally MacFarlane: by that time.
Sally MacFarlane: and I I didn't see any other comment. So I haven't seen any injections to this yet
Simon Dudley: it
Jason Frame: quickly. Yeah.
exactly.
Simon Dudley: should we maybe mention it one more time in discord, and then
Simon Dudley: if you're okay to talk, Gary, and we can go back to the Ci:
Gary Schulte: Yeah, you know, Sally, I heard I heard what Sally was saying. and she pretty much gave the same update. I was gonna give that this just that Pki Qbft. Test that that
Gary Schulte: Justin was having difficulty with, but otherwise
Gary Schulte: some very close Github actions is very close.
Right?
Simon Dudley: Thank you.
Simon Dudley: So the time rotation and contribute to calls.
Simon Dudley: yeah, I
Simon Dudley: not entirely sure on the details of this.
Simon Dudley: Give an update about
Simon Dudley: As far as I understand this.
Simon Dudley: Maybe.
Simon Dudley: instead of having 2 calls it constant time, we're going to kind of.
Simon Dudley: We might end up with 3 time options. That is it that change, or
Sally MacFarlane: yes, I that was done. I's proposal, so
Sally MacFarlane: I
Sally MacFarlane: proposed that we skip this and put it on the agenda for the next call.
Sally MacFarlane: Since then I was not here.
Sally MacFarlane: and with a lot of items on the agenda to cover.
Simon Dudley: so
Simon Dudley: for me or rename based in notes this is one I've got on there at the moment. We've got on the Hyper Ledger discord. We've got a basic channel, and we've got basically notes. I think was
Simon Dudley: kind of originally created to split up some of the
Simon Dudley: node operational kind of conversations
Simon Dudley: that
Simon Dudley: when we had a lot of
Simon Dudley: uses asking things in discord during the during and off the merge.
Simon Dudley: and I think now they kind of
Simon Dudley: basically you know it just kind of used interchangeably to
Simon Dudley: depending on which user
Simon Dudley: so I don't think there's any meaningful split between them
Simon Dudley: which seems to me like we should have. Fold it back into one channel.
Simon Dudley: Robin, create and use the correction, or if people still see value in it.
Simon Dudley: maybe renaming it, or or or getting some better indication of maybe what
Simon Dudley: the split should be. for example Me? Why I want to split up steak is from from the normal basic channel probably get rid of
Simon Dudley: Hello,
Simon Dudley: Those conversations, if anyone finds value in that. But I think if all the contributors are
Simon Dudley: looking at both channels, then it's kind of pointless. You might as well be on one.
Simon Dudley: Has anyone got any thoughts or objections to that?
Sally MacFarlane: I I agree that they use interchange for yeah, I think we should
Sally MacFarlane: it? It makes sense to me to follow them back into one channel.
Jason Frame: Yes, I I think we're just in that monitoring both terms, and some discussions can happen now.
Sally MacFarlane: and it confuses you.
Simon Dudley: Yeah.
Simon Dudley: It seems like a unnecessary friction at this point.
Simon Dudley: Got it?
Simon Dudley: I'll put like a phone to, or something on on discord to make the final decision.
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Simon Dudley: What does it generate to change about discussion
Simon Dudley: the next month, Originally the east of it?
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah, that was a something that I threw out there as a Has anyone had an experience with this before I i'm
Sally MacFarlane: I don't think it's at the level where we
Sally MacFarlane: want to have this discussion in base.
Sally MacFarlane: You know that big a fish to fry right now?
Sally MacFarlane: The why I raised it was there seem to be a lot of conflicts being generated by the change log itself.
Sally MacFarlane: because, you know, everyone with every Pr. Is adding to the last line of the change look
Sally MacFarlane: and I
Sally MacFarlane: throughout a different suggestion. That was basically sorting the change log
Sally MacFarlane: by something. Whatever ordering makes sense. And
Sally MacFarlane: i'm not sure people are doing that, or just being more proactive about
Sally MacFarlane: resolving change on conflicts. But there seems to have been feel a complex sorry. I think it's fine.
Sally MacFarlane: For example, all the Eos changes have been grouped together in the 10 to the entries, which, like that, makes total sense.
Simon Dudley: Cool.
Simon Dudley: propose deprecation of good or privacy.
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah. So I've also posted a longer message about this in the basic contributors channel. But essentially
Sally MacFarlane: we have 3. Call 3 privacy modes in by 2, and one of them essentially is interoperable privacy with Go for them, and because of the
Sally MacFarlane: to because of technical details. With that it. It.
Sally MacFarlane: It requires hooks quite deep into the transaction processing and block processing parts of the code base.
Sally MacFarlane: and
Sally MacFarlane: that doesn't seem to be in a demand for that interoperable privacy marriage. So we don't take anyone to using it.
Sally MacFarlane: So we're proposing. You need to deprecate that
Sally MacFarlane: perhaps you might advise him
Sally MacFarlane: and if we
Sally MacFarlane: get the deprecation that is in the next quarterly release, then
Sally MacFarlane: it, as in 23 to one then we could remove that feature in 23.4, and that will remove a fair bit of friction for main that development.
Sally MacFarlane: So I guess putting it out there if there's thoughts, objections, and so forth.
Sally MacFarlane: Make them
Simon Dudley: doesn't sound like anyone has any got some objections at this point
Simon Dudley: sounds good to me.
Simon Dudley: I guess the any question would be, is there any impact on the go call
Simon Dudley: perfect?
Simon Dudley: So outside of basically.
Sally MacFarlane: No. So people who are using Obviously, the Forum can continue to this policy. But when we're not proposing a changing.
Simon Dudley: and it it doesn't affect like any.
Sally MacFarlane: only for privacy.
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Simon Dudley: cool. Thanks.
Simon Dudley: it, I guess. Maybe continue that
Simon Dudley: and just go to where that would be. The next
Simon Dudley: may not out
Simon Dudley: and final one on the other business. Is this a. Pr. To as
Simon Dudley: Maintainer?
Simon Dudley: yeah, I think there's maybe 2 more base required. so if anyone hasn't voted, please do
Gary Schulte: I counted I kind of 13.
Simon Dudley: Oh.
Sally MacFarlane: that things enough.
Simon Dudley: I mean.
Simon Dudley: I'm going to try it. My hand.
Jason Frame: That's right.
Simon Dudley: That's good.
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Simon Dudley: thanks.
Simon Dudley: Okay. Next one I can form at least process and policy.
Gary Schulte: Yeah, I put that on the agenda just because I think our current release process, at least, as we have interpreted
Gary Schulte: trunk based development where
Gary Schulte: main is always releasing, and therefore our release processes to release from Maine, I think, has
Gary Schulte: cause us to have some
Gary Schulte: release quality issues, since whatever we would
Gary Schulte: do, extended testing, or you know, burn in on is a is a moving target. We're we're continually merging into main. So there's a
Gary Schulte: it just a challenge to having
Gary Schulte: confidence, or rather disproving the release of any particular commit.
Gary Schulte: And having some conversations
Gary Schulte: with Adrian with folks on Chupo, with Sally, with Jason.
Gary Schulte: I think that
Gary Schulte: we can stick with our
Gary Schulte: trunk-based development approach where Maine is always releasing.
Gary Schulte: but we could just kind of tweak it a bit
Gary Schulte: to
Gary Schulte: Essentially give us time between cutting a release and making it official.
Gary Schulte: if we
Gary Schulte: where to cut a release
Gary Schulte: some days ahead of when the official release date is that would give us time to progressively burn in a a release and give us
Gary Schulte: time to evaluate whether a release is
Gary Schulte: of sufficient quality to be considered a production release.
Gary Schulte: I could actually
Gary Schulte: Daniel
Gary Schulte: put together a
Gary Schulte: kind of a
Gary Schulte: no, but it's it's a
Gary Schulte: I want to call the straw man. It's a it's a start at what a release process might look like, whereas today, we release.
Gary Schulte: say, on a Wednesday
Gary Schulte: we do an immediate cut from Maine.
Gary Schulte: and do a release, and we rely strictly on
Gary Schulte: integration test acceptance tests basically our Ci pipeline to prove out that that releases is quality enough to be released.
Gary Schulte: and what we are proposing
Gary Schulte: is that we would cut a release by by by a creating a release branch from Maine. So we're still releasing from Maine, but we do it some days in advance.
Gary Schulte: and that would give us the opportunity to do progressive burning on various networks of increasing levels of traffic, increasing levels of economic
Gary Schulte: activity. And
Gary Schulte: really, you know, just value for the validators, and and we could
Gary Schulte: get better signal that way.
Gary Schulte: I think that we can do this in a really light touch minimal way where we continue to do
Gary Schulte: trunk-based development without
Gary Schulte: significantly impacting our processes. But we can
Gary Schulte: greatly and increase the quality.
Gary Schulte: So I kind of want to just float this out and get this on the on the agenda. I know we've had a lot of discussions in the past about our release process, and there's
Gary Schulte: some differences of opinion. But I think that everybody agrees that
Gary Schulte: trunk based development is our goal.
Gary Schulte: and I think that we can. We can leverage trunk, based development and still give ourselves
Gary Schulte: time to to prove or disprove the release quality of any particular commit ahead of time.
Gary Schulte: So just kind of wanted to open the floor to that and see what folks had to say about it.
Jason Frame: I really like the idea, but give me a small time to test it. But in before the release, and
Jason Frame: don't like the fact of the current process, at least the way we many is that we have to
Jason Frame: maybe include changes that we haven't originally. Texted
Jason Frame: yeah better process. So I think this is a a big improvement. It's more time to have more stable.
Jason Frame: what I kind of wondering is
Jason Frame: but this they use for the next release. That's plan to go out next week and Are there any changes that we need to
Jason Frame: do before the release could happen at the moment Like, is it comparable to current
Jason Frame: set up in terms of writing and everything else? It wasn't just a
Gary Schulte: Yeah, I I think we could incrementally implement this. I mean, I think that it's to go with this process straight away. Is it so? Would be slightly manual in a couple of the steps, but I think that things could be automated a bit in terms of
Gary Schulte: You know the the the burn and release testing
Gary Schulte: Maybe make things a bit more transparent as well. If
Gary Schulte: we want to have
Gary Schulte: a a vote, perhaps, or if there's a a thumbs up thumbs down from the contributors about Whether we think a release has sufficient quality to release. We need to be more transparent about
Gary Schulte: what we're basing those decisions on.
Gary Schulte: I I think that that's gonna take a little bit of effort to make those instances more transparent. The canary nodes the validator nodes etc. I maybe there's a way that we can do that.
Gary Schulte: that provides transparency without
Gary Schulte: necessarily.
Gary Schulte: no, no. I mean
Gary Schulte: that's to be discussed, I think. But I I think if we're if we're all going to make a call collectively on the quality of our release, we need to, have those results more transparent.
Gary Schulte: But that said, I think we can still do this process where we
Gary Schulte: cut a branch ahead of time and give it sufficient time to burn, and and
Gary Schulte: if it's manually sharing the results
Gary Schulte: I think that that's an an acceptable workaround to do to get incremental progress towards quality. while we work on our
Gary Schulte: automation and transparency.
Gary Schulte: I think there's some some tactical things as well regarding docker images
Gary Schulte: that we don't want to overwrite latest.
Gary Schulte: but I think that that's not going to be terribly difficult to resolve. if we release ahead of time, we don't want to impact what
Gary Schulte: the
Gary Schulte: the latest basic releases.
Gary Schulte: So I I think that there's a little bit of work that needs to be done on the Ci pipeline there, but that's not anything that would block us to do to use this type of incremental process on the next release, which is scheduled for next week on Wednesday.
Gary Schulte: It's my personal opinion.
Sally MacFarlane: Yeah, I think. having the longer
Sally MacFarlane: time
Sally MacFarlane: is
Sally MacFarlane: really important. And yeah, as as you say, there's been some recent issues with releases that have only become apparent after that that burning
Sally MacFarlane: has happened. So I think baking that into our release process would be awesome, and having that transparency. However, we provide that transparency of the results from that burning, if it's manual. For now I think that's that's cool.
Sally MacFarlane: but yeah, being being transparent and communicating that that would
Sally MacFarlane: an improvement
Sally MacFarlane: to how we do it right now.
Gary Schulte: Yeah, I think we're asking for for
Gary Schulte: right now. We've just had exceptions. We
Gary Schulte: A couple of times I've
Gary Schulte: thrown something out onto the contributor channel and said, hey, we're
Gary Schulte: We're seeing issues with this release.
Gary Schulte: How do we feel about postponing. How do we feel about delaying
Gary Schulte: You know. How do we feel about a hot fix release to address the quality issues that we've had.
Gary Schulte: And I think that in the absence of that transparency asking people for that type of feedback is.
Gary Schulte: Yeah, it's. It's not. It's not super effective. So
Gary Schulte: no.
Gary Schulte: we definitely do a better job of making these results
Gary Schulte: viewable
Gary Schulte: by contributors, at least.
Simon Dudley: Yeah, i'm in agreement as well. But it's it seems like, the best repression. What we've currently got.
Simon Dudley: yeah, like
Simon Dudley: it. It doesn't make sense to me to release from main. If this things that like definitely untested on that.
Simon Dudley: So I would be for this as well.
Simon Dudley: I think maybe in terms of Can we do it for next week?
Simon Dudley: the I mean it's worth asking. But it's possible, like if the expectation was that
Simon Dudley: things
Simon Dudley: that we got on to main, that we have merged on to mainly by
Simon Dudley: Wednesday would be released if that was is the current expectation.
Simon Dudley: and we are saying, we will shift it back to. When would it be this week, the Friday, the it would effectively, If we did this for the next release. It would be end of day. Friday. That was
Gary Schulte: tentatively when we would cut that release that we would burn in so progressively until Wednesday.
Simon Dudley: Yeah.
Simon Dudley: so yes, we should probably check with everyone that they're okay with that If it's going to be cut off on Friday instead of sometime next week.
Simon Dudley: I think we should maybe bear in mind the thing that I said in discord. I think
Simon Dudley: about trying to get something ready for a a definite next week.
Simon Dudley: That might be a consideration.
Simon Dudley: and that was the
Gary Schulte: Yeah. I I think we can probably
Gary Schulte: continue this discussion on discord. I just kind of wanted to bring it up in a in an open forum. Just get a feel for where people are at with a little bit of a reinterpretation of
Gary Schulte: our release process. I want to.
Gary Schulte: Ideally, a light touch approach would be
Gary Schulte: a good incremental way forward.
Jason Frame: I think we just need to play one of those cast off.
Jason Frame: if we top this with the it's the releases rotations page to the the at least we could put it to cut off date. So
Jason Frame: no thanks.
Simon Dudley: Oh, thanks for that. Got it.
Simon Dudley: So that's good.
Simon Dudley: Did anyone want to discuss the
Gary Schulte: Is there news there?
Simon Dudley: Hi doing
Simon Dudley: That's updated?
Simon Dudley: maybe it should get updated. I think this also a
Simon Dudley: a public version of a send this board with a a basic roadmap on
Simon Dudley: I don't have a link to that to hand, and i'm not sure what the state of that is in terms of being public. I believe there is a version that is accessible.
Simon Dudley: But yeah, i'll maybe
Simon Dudley: leave that some of like that to to put a link on here. Maybe we should use that as the breakout going forward.
Jason Frame: I think it's on the top of that.
Simon Dudley: I really
Simon Dudley: Okay, Here we go. Thanks.
Simon Dudley: Yes, sorry. This is
Simon Dudley: probably a better one in our previous document. hopefully, more up to date.
Simon Dudley: Does anyone want to discuss that?
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Simon Dudley: So any future topics?
Simon Dudley: is there anything else at all.
Simon Dudley: Okay.
Simon Dudley: Thank you very much. there's a few things. Look out for updates on this
Simon Dudley: update after this, I think
Gary Schulte: I don't. Thanks for facilitating.
Simon Dudley: Hey, Hello!
Simon Dudley: Have a good day.