Zcash Protocol Hangout, Dev Fund Edition

[mistfpga]

Hi,

@joshs

That’s correct.

We worked through ECC priorities for the next 6 months and made a few org changes within my team.

That is really cool.

It would have been nice if you could have just dropped a short note to the forum explaining that though. Especially seeing as you were responding to me complaining about the lack of information and communication from the ECC.

@joshs

I’m not sure what you mean exactly.

I have asked this question several times, I even link to it in my above post. (the 10 day old one)

Yes, I am looking for an answer to the question regarding the proposals. “Were the GitHub versions used to judge or was it the forum versions?” - to me it seems the forum versions were used.

It may or may not make a difference to how the ECC perceives things, but it certainly makes a difference to any modifications I make to the proposals.

This is my original response to Hels, (21 days ago according to the forum software)

One of my proposals I think was not judged correctly. Can you please confirm that the ECC looked at the pull requests (.rst’s) and not the Forum thread - You cannot update a forum post 2 months after it was initially created. - The link they have provided links to the forum, not the GitHub…

This is the version that should have been reviewed.

• https://github.com/mistfpga/zips/blob/master/Genuine%20Protocol%20opt-in%20donation%20feature.rst

@gtank @daira can you tell me which version was used, please?

Thanks,

Steve

This also goes towards a number of other proposals I wrote, not just for myself but for other people.

In addition, the forum versions of these are different to the .rst files I submitted as pull requests. All of the links on the blog go to this forum. It is not a huge deal but, it caused real problems in the voice chat too, because I was looking at different versions to everyone else. (they were looking at the forum versions, I was using local copies and my .rst’s - that’s what I double check, when I say “let me just check” in the livestream.

So were these judged on the pull requests or on the forum posts? (you cannot edit a forum post after 2 months)

For a nicely formatted version of the pull requests, I have linked my merge requests, from my GitHub.

• [ZIP 1001] Final: ZIP proposal Keep the block distribution as initally defined. 90% to miners

Should be (and is different to the actual pull request)

• zips/Keep the block distribution as initially defined.rst at master · mistfpga/zips · GitHub

Then:

• [ZIP 1007] Dev Fund Supplemental Proposal: enforce devfund commitments with legal charter

Should be (and is different to the actual pull request)

• zips/Enforce DevFund Commitments with a Legal Charter.rst at master · mistfpga/zips · GitHub

I am given credit for kek’s proposal, this is mentioned in the forum thread but not the .rst

• Kek’s proposal: fund ECC for 2 more years

• zips/delayed_choice.rst at master · mistfpga/zips · GitHub

notice is has the same header as

• zips/Changing Zcash supply curve.rst at master · mistfpga/zips · GitHub

So why am I an advocate for one and not the other? @kek should have been on both. (I don’t mind I will advocate for them both. it is just confusing)

Thanks for your time.