Highlights

Since it's so close to the scheduled update(~Oct 18th, 2018), the next release will be v0.13.0.0 rather than v0.12.4.0

The latest Proof of Work(PoW) changes to CryptoNightv2 could use some C++ developer scrutiny

Kovri is now officially hosted on Gitlab. The main Monero codebase may or may not move. Possibly Gitlab is primary and Github is a mirror. Monero may instead self-host with Gitlab software.

Code merge of BulletProofs and CryptoNightv2 to testnet is expected Monday/Tuesday (Sept 10/11 2018).

Next meeting September 16th, 2018

Full Log

<rehrar> Hello everyone. Dev meeting time. <rehrar> 1. Greetings <rehrar> anybody out there today? <vtnerd> yes <rbrunner> Hello! <oneiric_> hi <jtgrassie> hey <rehrar> 2. Brief review of what's been completed since the previous meeting <rehrar> What's been happening? <rehrar> lel <rbrunner> The blockchain grew :) <rehrar> Xeagu increases the blockchain size with his mass every week now <rehrar> slow week then? :) <jtgrassie> Kovri alpha yet? <rehrar> Kovri has had an alpha release since just before Defcon <rbrunner> Well, what did not happen is 0.12.4.0, and FluffyPony confirmed yesterday that it definitely won't happen anymore <rbrunner> Next ist 0.13.0.0 <jtgrassie> Makes sense <rehrar> ok, so all of that stuff is just being rolled into 0.13.0.0? <rbrunner> Looks like it <rehrar> Was there anything critical there? <rehrar> and did he happen to give any indication on the status of 0.13 when he spoke? <rbrunner> No, just a short confirmation what we already suspected over in moneru-gui <rbrunner> We have a hardfork date of October 18 <rehrar> so I hear <jtgrassie> Latest PoW change still seems under discussion <rbrunner> Well, a review would be nice, but hard to get by the necessary people with the knowledge ... <jtgrassie> I'd certainly welcome a vtnerd going over it <endogenic> not necessarily <endogenic> there are toonnnnss of c++ and hw devs in the world <endogenic> we need better outreach to devs specifically <endogenic> things like dev meetups for c++ people <endogenic> i'll start going and making announcements <jtgrassie> agreed <endogenic> "good opportunity to have your work recognized and make a big impact" <rehrar> "Change the world: Monero" <jtgrassie> we don't really know if a change is even needed for next HF <pigeons> let people building asics spend/waste a little more money first <endogenic> or "dont change the world: it was better when money was backed by something" lol <jtgrassie> I was refering to change of PoW, not the world - which yes needs changin! <rehrar> Alright, well, anything else happen this past week? <rehrar> Maybe not to be discussed in too much detail, but anonimal started the effort of moving off of Github <rehrar> kovri is now on gitlab <vtnerd> jtgrassie : yes I plan to scrub over it again, and have again somewhat now <rehrar> I know there was discussion of doing that with Monero in general <rbrunner> Which did not get very far, didn't it? <vtnerd> the sqrt stuff is the one iffy part where my eyes gloss over a bit <pigeons> moneromooo is setting up a gitlab instance <+moneromooo> Well, I was going to, but I didn't know anonimal did too. I thought he moved it to gitlab.com. <+moneromooo> Unless that's what he actually did. <rehrar> I think he is on gitlab.com, yes <pigeons> Yes I think that's what he did (move to gitlab.com) <+moneromooo> OK, then I'll do it. <jtgrassie> vtnerd: cool. What I liked about your last April changes is they were clear and simple. This PR is big. <rehrar> Monero doesn't necessarily have to be in the same place as kovri though? <+moneromooo> No. If he wants to move kovri there, he can. If not, not. <+moneromooo> It'd probably be less confusing to have it all in the same place though. <jtgrassie> I'd agree <rehrar> Alright. Whatever you guys decide. <@ArticMine> The question in my mind is how many developers and contributers to Monero support Microsoft <pigeons> what do you mean by "support"? <oneiric_> hopefully few <jtgrassie> I'd guess very few <rbrunner> With "support" you mean "would vote to stick with Microsoft"? <@ArticMine> I mean would want to continue using a Microsoft platform <@ArticMine> Yes <rehrar> I don't say this often <rehrar> but Microsoft is not bae <@ArticMine> So I suspect anonimal's move is just the tip of the iceberg. <oneiric_> I like that anonimal ripped off the bandage, and moved to gitlab <oneiric_> gets the ball rolling <pigeons> there does seem to be general rough anecodatal "consensus" among the more active contributors I see that they would prefer to move away <oneiric_> even if not final solution <rbrunner> Thankfully, technically, it does not matter much <rbrunner> Just linking to earlier things will be hard of course ... <pigeons> there are decent import tools in gitlab recently improved <@ArticMine> pigeons that is my read also <jtgrassie> I like the idea of GitLab as the primary repository and GitHub a mirror <endogenic> i thought it was already decided to do that <jtgrassie> That means anything that cannot be imported still has the legacy links <jtgrassie> endogenic: yes that was also my understanding <rbrunner> May I say that we "decide" in confusing ways sometimes ... <rehrar> decide here means that everyone agrees it's a good idea, and nobody gets it done <rehrar> Monero has cool word definitions like that <@fluffypony> I think the main thing is self-hosted GitLab vs gitlab.com <+moneromooo> \o/ <@fluffypony> and we're largely leaning towards self-hosted <@ArticMine> Yes <rbrunner> Makes sense, IMHO, if move then move right <rbrunner> Right being self-hosted <jtgrassie> but then someone has to maintain it and get called an ameteur when it goes down ;) <rehrar> I'm guessing we don't have an ETA on this though? <+moneromooo> None. <rehrar> purrrrfect <+moneromooo> Since pony's around, I want to talk about when to fork testnet whenever convenient. <oneiric_> is there a way to fund the server with FFS and have a group of trusted people with admin creds? <rehrar> take it away <oneiric_> my bad <rbrunner> take away what? <@fluffypony> moneromooo: is there anything preventing us from doing it tomororw? <rehrar> Oh, I thought moneromooo was going to ask some questions from pony <@fluffypony> *tomorrow <rehrar> that's what I meant take it away (to moneromooo) <@fluffypony> rehrar: he already did <rehrar> oh <+moneromooo> fluffypony: (1) merging the bulletproofs, and (2) maybe merging CNv2. <@fluffypony> we're getting dangerously close to when we should release 0.13 <+moneromooo> (2) being the annoying part here, since we can wait forever with no guarantee we'll get a review :/ <jtgrassie> 2 seems premature <rbrunner> Why only "maybe" for CNv2? Test the damn thing :) <@fluffypony> jtgrassie: we've got a fork coming up in 5 weeks, I don't think it's premature <+moneromooo> Because if it changes, we'll need to reorg testnet again. maybe not too much of a bother I guess. <oneiric_> looking forward to OhGodAGirl's review <+moneromooo> So I'd be fine merging 1 and 2 for now, and reorg on monday or tuesday if that's alright ? <@fluffypony> let's do Monday, we can always re-reorg if we need to <jtgrassie> fluffypony: fair enough, but we don't even know if it's needed really. <+moneromooo> And btw for those who don't know, it'd be *very* nice to have everyone running the release by the 11th, due to https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/4287 <+moneromooo> OK, monday then. I'll fixup the testnet reorg kludges. <@fluffypony> ok cool <jtgrassie> and by needed I just mean the CNv2 change <iDunk> Just a reminder that the testnet will be rolled back to a height where nethash is ~10 kH/s. <jtgrassie> this CNv2 PR needs much more review given the amount of changes <+moneromooo> Oh, yes, forgot this one ^_^ <rbrunner> jtgrassie: It's only testnet :) <rbrunner> And if it gets used maybe bugs will surface earlier <rehrar> moneromooo when you say it'd be nice to have everyone running the release, do you mean devy people or everyone everyone? <jtgrassie> true, I'm just paranoid with large changes! <+moneromooo> Everyone. <+moneromooo> (if they care about DNSSEC) <rehrar> alright, I'll see about coordinating something with the Community and Outreach workgroups <rehrar> I think it'd be beneficial to do it anyways so we get as few "support" questions as possible <rehrar> Alright, anything else? <pigeons> luigi1111: fluffypony maybe look into merging https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/4342 which fixes windows build <rbrunner> yeah, windows build working would be nice of course <iDunk> And 4352 fixes linux builds. <rbrunner> Anything that does not need fixing? :) <+moneromooo> Bulletproofs hopefully. <rbrunner> Is this the time and forum to make a final decision about the name of the release? <rehrar> Alright, well, pending other topics of discussion, I think we can decide on next meeting date and adjourn. <endogenic> do we want to review the bulletproofs changes since the audit? <endogenic> i know ops are confirmed as constant time etc <+moneromooo> Well actually they might not be constant time, interestingly. <oneiric_> when will quarkslab report be released? <+moneromooo> Oh, kinda forgot about that one. <+moneromooo> After 0.13 I guess, they found a DoS which was supposed to go into 0.12.4.0. <oneiric_> Ok, thanks moneromooo. When is 0.13 planned? <+moneromooo> See above. <rbrunner> About that release name...? Beryllium Bullet, Beryllium Bullet Cluster, or something else? Or not the time and place to decide this? <endogenic> so.... bulletproofs... <oneiric_> saw it being discussed, but no date. unless it was the "monday or tuesday"? <rehrar> rbrunner: it was being discussed in the Monero forums, let me grab the link <+moneromooo> That's the testnet reorg. <rehrar> https://forum.getmonero.org/6/ideas/90722/release-name-for-oct-0-13-0-hard-fork <rbrunner> rehrar: Yes, thanks, saw it there as well, but that's again a question about deciding ... right? <oneiric_> so past oct 18 for a report on bulletproofs? <rbrunner> Would be nice to have the name, to prepare docs, ReadMes, the installer, etc. <endogenic> maybe we can discuss release name after we confirm if bulletproofs needs to be reviewed again <endogenic> if not let's just put it live on mainnet now. yolo <rehrar> endogenic: because you want Berylium Bulletproofs? <rbrunner> The review would be for the changes made since the reviews, right? <endogenic> nah it's for the name <endogenic> just kidding, yes <oneiric_> moneromooo: if quarkslab found a DoS in bulletproofs, why does that hold the release of paper until after they're implemented? <+moneromooo> It was not in BPs. <rehrar> ah, so we waiting for get the next release out. <oneiric_> understood. Is there anyway to remove that section, and release an amended version of the paper? <rehrar> So if we're not goign to decide the name now, and you want to be a part of the discussion, it'd probably be best to post on that forum. I think there was a reddit thread too. Otherwise keep an eagle eye on the IRC channels for when it will be discussed <+moneromooo> stoffu: I've added 5 days' worth of blocks to the testnet bodge in the BP PR if you want to OK again ^_^ <endogenic> rbrunner: my reply was to you fwiw <rbrunner> Yes :) <+moneromooo> oneiric_: maybe, notmy call though. <oneiric_> no worries, thanks moneromooo <endogenic> can we ask them? <endogenic> i guess sarang is the point of contact <endogenic> afk <oneiric_> ok, I can ask during tomorrow's MRL meeting <rehrar> ye <rehrar> alright guys, I guess that's it. <rehrar> September 23rd sound ok? Or as we approach release, should we have it every week? <endogenic> not it <endogenic> i will ask again about bp change review at mrl mtg tmw as well but same thing will happen <endogenic> now afk <oneiric_> thanks endogenic <rehrar> I will tentatively set a meeting up for next week, and it can be canceled then. So the 16th. Unless there are any objections. * Tom_Cruise (~Tom@cpe-24-24-133-238.socal.res.rr.com) Quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) <rehrar> It can be super quick, just touching base on release stuff <rbrunner> With a meta entry so people don't forget ... <rehrar> indeed so! <rbrunner> Nice :) <rehrar> alright, that's it then. Thanks for coming everyone