IRCaBot 2.1.0
GPLv3 © acetone, 2021-2022
#saltr
/2026/03/08
~dr|z3d
@RN_
@StormyCloud
@T3s|4
@postman
@zzz
%Liorar
%snex
+FreefallHeavens_
+Onn4l7h
+Onn4|7h
+Over
+altec_lansing
+nyaa2pguy
+poriori
+profetikla
+qend-irc2p
+r00tobo
+uop23ip
Arch
Danny
Holmes
Irc2PGuest28384
Irc2PGuest47578
Irc2PGuest78874
Irc2PGuest94591
Meow
NiceBoat_
OfficialCIA
SilentWave
U1F642
Wikk_0_
acetone_
ahiru
anontor
cims
eyedeekay_
floatyfloatilla
leopold
mahlay
makoto
mareki2p_
mesh
n2
nilbog
not_bob_afk
orignal
r00tobo[2]
red
sektorchef
thetia
user_
utp
vivid_reader56
jpk68 Hey, sorry for posting this again. I had a question about the Monero CCS proposal that was posted by the I2P devs a while ago
RN_ what specificly are you asking? you just stated you have a question. ask it please.
jpk68 The task overview of the proposal states that one should maintain presence on the I2P IRC to consult the changes with developers
jpk68 I'm just wondering if this is still the case/devs are still willing to do this. Just making sure
jpk68 I have some experience related to this, and opened a CCS proposal for it yesterday.
jpk68 I added I2P support to Monero P2Pool, etc.
T3s|4 jpk68: 'the proposal states that one should maintain presence on the I2P IRC
jpk68 Yes?
jpk68 That's fine with me, I'm just making sure
T3s|4 jpk68: ^that is highly ambiguous, at best...which i2p IRC channel? Did you mean #i2p-dev?
jpk68 I'm not sure which channel, that's why I'm asking for more info :)
jpk68 As the proposal was written by zzz and idk (which, to my knowledge, are reputable I2P devs), surely there would be some clear answer
T3s|4 jpk68: zzz is here now, so just him directly
zzz please repeat the question jpk68
jpk68 Hey, I'm wondering about the CCS proposal you and idk posted a while ago
jpk68 It ended up being closed later... I have some experience related to that (such as adding I2P support to Monero P2Pool) and opened a similar CCS yesterday
jpk68 I was just wondering how the communication would work if I2P devs are still willing
jpk68 as the proposal from you mentions staying up to date with I2P IRC matters
zzz you're asking as a would-be user or a would-be coder/implementer?
jpk68 As a coder
jpk68 Obviously I have nowhere near as much I2P experience as people here (I would imagine), but I'm willing to give it a try :)
zzz I'll give you the background and then answer present-day questions
zzz we've been trying to get monero to do this for 5-10 years. Given multiple presentations at CCC, DEFCON, and Monerocons
zzz we orignally had a bounty
zzz then an inside guy said no, it should be a CCS proposal
zzz so then we did that
zzz and they said, if you're not going to do the work, this is an invalid CCS proposal, close it
zzz we wrote it as a roadmap for how somebody else would/should do it and they didn't like the way it was written
zzz so thats where it sits as of today
zzz if you'd like to try, then resurrect it or copy and modify it and put in how much you want
zzz our offer of help still stands, probably best in #i2p-dev, I can give you voice there
zzz and we can probably pledge some XMR too, would have to talk to Stormycloud about that
zzz any other questions?
jpk68 Yeah, it's pretty annoying that it's taking them so long
jpk68 As I mentioned, I have an open proposal for doing that exact thing.
zzz never been even close to a priority for them
jpk68 Well, I am pretty confident my CCS can get accepted if I manage to drum up enough support for it
jpk68 And thank you for the Stormycloud offer, I really appreciate that
jpk68 If you're willing, it would be great if you could put a word in about my proposal, as it does need loose consensus to be merged
jpk68 I can give you any info you might need about that
zzz <Stormycloud> If you want to email me your proposal @jpk68 I can look after I get back from this conference.
zzz <Stormycloud> admin@stormycloud.org
jpk68 Sure, sounds good
jpk68 Thanks for your help again :)
jpk68 zzz: I tried to send an email to the address you mentioned, but the message couldn't be delivered
jpk68 Might there be some sort of spam filter that blocks Tutanota?
jpk68 17:46 <+jpk68> zzz: I tried to send an email to the address you mentioned, but the message couldn't be delivered
jpk68 Sorry, not sure if the message sent the first time
zzz jpk68, please register your nick so I can give you perma-voice in #i2p-dev
zzz can't help with email, that's Stormycloud's email
jpk68 Is there a guide on how to do that? The IRC link on i2p.net seems broken
Stormycloud Try admin@i2p.net @jpk68
jpk68 I am only familiar with NickServ on Libera, sorry :)
jpk68 Okay, thanks
zzz if you'd like my endorsement for your CCS it's going to need more detail and probably use technical instead of time-based milestones.
zzz as written you're just working on monero and if it takes you 12 months instead of three you're going to ask for 4x the funding since there's no merge milestone
zzz /msg nickserv help
jpk68 Not quite sure what you mean. The title of the proposal is 'work on I2P support'
jpk68 Also, in the original CCS you wrote, you mentioned it would likely take somewhere from 2 to 6 months depending on experience level
jpk68 It is worth noting that the amount of funding I am asking for is less than a quarter of what you suggested, IIRC
jpk68 The Monero CCS also required time-based milestones
jpk68 *requires
zzz right. now make your own estimate and price the request based on that for the entire job
zzz i don't know what the XMR/USD rate was when we wrote that ))
jpk68 Okay, registered now with NickServ. Hopefully it worked
jpk68 The exchange rate is about half of what it is now
zzz no I don't think time-based milestones are required, see e.g. repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/blob/master/btcpayserver-plugin.md
zzz if you're doing one thing, not a generic dev, then the milestones should be for that one thing
jpk68 True, I had forgotten about that. However that is more of an exception than the rule
jpk68 I will consider changing the milestones, but also, I can't just do several months of work without any guarantee of pay
jpk68 The work I do during the alloted time can be picked up by other devs if need be, although I doubt that would happen
jpk68 Please consider that the amount I am asking for is barely more than a minimum wage job where I live. I think the rate is more than fair.
jpk68 Also, it took me less than three weeks to add I2P support to P2Pool. I can't really imagine this taking an entire year :)
zzz yup you have perma voice in #i2p-dev now
jpk68 Perfect, thanks :)
zzz I'm going to strongly recommend that the final milestone be that your code is merged. Intermediate milestones if any are up to you but need to be verifiable, not time-based
zzz not arguing about the rate, ask for what you need
jpk68 zzz: Okay, sure. However, can that goal be for a second proposal?
jpk68 Since you and idk originally said it would take 2 to 6 months, it's hard to guarantee that completion will happen in just 3 months
jpk68 I propose that the first proposal is just as it is, and then ones after that (if it's not finished by then) require a verifiable goal for completion
jpk68 If not, that's still fine and I can work around it. It would just be a lot more preferable to me, as otherwise I will have to remove the proposal and make a new one for a longer period of time than 3 months
zzz 2-6 was our wild guess based on unknown talent. You can make a much better guess based on your experience
zzz I'm sure you can update the proposal by updating the merge request, you don't need to remove and recreate
zzz look, it's up to you. If you're putting the risk on the funders with time-based milestones, it's a lot less likely to be funded
zzz if it's time-based, you're leaning on your credibility/reputation with the potential funder pool
zzz it's not a small question. How the milestones are written allocates the risk to one side or the other
jpk68 Thanks
jpk68 zzz: Sorry, I got disconnected
zzz look, it's up to you. If you're putting the risk on the funders with time-based milestones, it's a lot less likely to be funded
zzz if it's time-based, you're leaning on your credibility/reputation with the potential funder pool
zzz it's not a small question. How the milestones are written allocates the risk to one side or the other
jpk68 I have no concerns with funding, as that will be provided by the Monero general fund
zzz funders will evaluate the risk if it's on them, as you should price in the risk if it's on you
jpk68 I just need approval for it. Would you be willing to do that with the current model?
jpk68 I understand the risk there, and I can assure you that any future CCS for this task beyond the original one will have non-time-based milestones