00:10:50 Just tell us your original problem instead of beating around the bush 00:11:12 I think the biggest issue with the report is that it is long and trails off into things unrelated to the milestone 00:11:16 why can’t the rules be clear and stand on their own? 00:11:39 https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/489#note_26721 py_verse: 00:12:05 Because they were written in 1992 00:12:35 are developers allowed to develop locally until they publish and request payment for milestones? should have a clear answer 00:12:38 Well i agree but did you just wake up and Choose to check if CCS rules are flawed or not? 00:12:39 Or you were trying to do something but you were afraid that rules might restrict you 00:13:57 > <@woodser:monero.social> why can’t the rules be clear and stand on their own? 00:13:59 Well i agree but did you just wake up and Choose to check if CCS rules are flawed or not? 00:14:01 Or you were trying to do something but you were afraid that ccs rules might restrict you 00:14:03 Yes 00:14:10 ofrnxmr it depends how? 00:17:44 Any milestone being claimed should have source fully available 00:18:03 If the milestone is code 00:19:05 If the milestone is not code, like "i need $ to submit to app store", we dont expect the dev to release their apple app store keys 00:23:06 The main thing is that the code for the milestone is not in violation of the code. 00:23:07 Rule 4 "mule be permissively licensed" does not dictate what license must be used 00:24:58 This is Agplv3 iirc, so its required that modifications are made pu lic 00:25:06 public* 00:25:51 ofrnxmr gotcha 00:25:53 makes sense 00:27:24 if you dont release the software publicly, you (shouldnt afaict) have to release source code. But releasing publicly must include source 00:27:56 I think the drama here is less about the current milestone, and more about the breach of the license a couple weeks back 00:30:07 ofrnxmr i don't know which milestone / project you're referring to. nor breach. 00:30:35 https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/489#note_26721 00:31:11 This project. And a couple weeks ago, beta binaries were pushed out and advertised to the public, but didn't have accompanying source code 00:32:25 WTF I just had to read? How do you suppose to publish the code before you've developed it, you, stupid retard?! 00:32:27 The rule says that you cannot restrictively __license__ the code during the development and don't even try to do it locally with your dirty little hands, or they will FUCKING KILL YOU!!!! ☠️ 00:32:55 The binaries were pulled, instead of releasing the source. 00:32:57 had the binaries never been released, i dont think we'd have this drama right now. But the release was a breach of the license (and our rule). Pulling the binaries means were jb compliance with the rule, but not with agplv3 00:33:39 ofrnxmr: eventually both code and bins were released? because i checked a few days ago and found everything i was looking for 00:34:04 No, the code wasnt afaik 00:34:13 which component? 00:34:37 yeah i suspected it was this project 00:34:43 The app itself 00:34:53 gotcha 00:36:11 You can share bins privately within your org w/o source, but cannot release publicly. Again, i think were causing drama over a mistake, but its hard to "unsee" things that were seen 00:37:13 its my OPINION that if there is a holdup, that is why 00:38:24 To directly answer woodser- yes tou can dev in private. You only need to release code when you release products or request milestones 00:39:58 the binaries were pulled instead of publishing the code. my understanding is the milestone payout is now being withheld due to breach of rules, which were rectified, so I wanted to clarify the rules 00:40:35 (the code for the milestone has been published under a permissive license) 00:40:43 Pulling the binaries doesnt put you back in compliance with agplv3 afaict 00:41:24 Its not the milestone that is blocking, its the ccs itself (the binary release violating the license) 00:44:59 afaict, the milestone is properly sourced and eligible for release. Only thing in the way is the lack of source for the binary the was released. Maybe i'm wrong, but thats what this looks like to me 00:45:34 "made a mistake. Wont happen again" would usually suffice, but maybe precedent is being set ? I _assume_ that releasing source for the / a binary would rectify any concerns. 🤷‍♂️ 00:47:18 good framing. looks like we need to look into the wording of agplv3 00:47:32 also curious that the guy doesn't just release the source at this point 00:47:34 Its not like we have any idea what that bin was built out of, so we cant prove any source release matches the bin.. probably just drawing a hard line about importance of licenses when it comes to spending money that was essentially earmarked and not raised 00:47:41 and claim 2 milestones instead of 1 01:20:34 plow sof is sleeping :) 01:21:10 i think the quickest solution to this is kewbit release the app source. 01:22:20 i don't think anyone here has ever seen ccs not pay a person that has met all expectations, so since there is clearly source available, it should be released, without fear of not being compensated for it 01:23:20 reading the agplv3, it very clearly is meant to dictate that source always be released. ccs mandates that the license be followed. therefore the source has to be released. 01:24:30 the released dart library source is applying agplv3, if not monerod woodser 01:51:39 it was a mistake to publish the preview binaries and they were pulled down. now payments for different milestones are being withheld. am I understanding that his CCS proposal is effectively terminated because of this mistake, unless the source code to those unpublished binaries is released? 02:07:36 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Maybe wait for plowsof and luigi 02:50:20 I thought the source *was* available, but will have to recheck more closely if the source that's available matches the bins I haven't deleted :P there's pub.dev/haveno published as well 02:52:53 err sorry, that's pub.dev/packages/haveno 02:53:36 and promising work in pub.dev/packages/i2p as well 04:11:26 feel free to check out the source too https://github.com/KewbitXMR/flutter_haveno 04:13:03 see if you can spot I problem I guess? 04:21:38 Good luck reversing a flutter app to see if it matches source/doesn't contain malware :^) 04:21:55 It's a pain in the ass :))) how convenient 04:24:28 I cant, it's not longer available, I wasn't sure why the first milestone wasn't paid it was instead refused despite being completed and open sourced and also licences with like the most copyleft licence there is .. AGPLv3 there is literally nothing more I could have done for the milestone 04:26:15 it is sad for sure, but of course most of this is a ploy now because obviously I was going to not be happy about it all these random ppl popping out of the shadows suddengly to hate 04:28:29 What are you talking about? Since this is your CCS, it wasn't you who released proprietary binaries? 04:29:27 Sure, did I specifically ask you to download them though? 04:30:03 Should I just magic CI / CD pipeines out of thin air instantly ready for you all for free? 04:30:57 sorry I didn't do more than build an entire app for haveno, ill keep your comment in mind for next time 04:31:36 ??? You're either malicious or a contractor from hell 04:31:41 ahh wait, obviouly, its not going to happen again 04:31:46 Must be! 04:32:05 There are no logical explainations for any of it of course 04:32:15 its just a contractor from hell :) 04:32:38 Who's alt is this :P 04:33:21 Let me get this right. For one moment you said it is open source and AGPLv3 licensed. Someone else says it was proprietary binaries. All the while my understanding is that there were some binaries somewhere, that got pulled. So... when did the source code become available, before or after binaries were public? 04:33:50 The proprietary binaries line throws me off the woods, what is it? 😂 04:35:10 The honest truth is I had never licensed a piece of software ever but I'm now very conscious of licensing 04:35:18 It was explained to you above. You broke the policy of your own license (your dependencies' licenses too) and the CCS policy. Sheer stupidity if you don't understand what is wrong. 04:36:04 yes I am aware, I accepted it already no need to reiterate, ultimate everyones going to be mad the ploy didnt work on me 04:36:25 im just glad I reserved the builds now 04:36:34 was a smart move in the end 04:36:46 when true colors came out 04:36:58 Of yourself I assume 04:37:05 (hopefully not) 04:37:09 thats what I've taken solace in basically 04:37:35 I'm still waiting for an answer! 😂 04:37:48 lol I've worked 4 months of honet work on this 04:39:12 its just funny all of this, starts pretty much immediately after I tell diego I jusrt dont trust him, which I dont he gave me then an ultimatum which I refused, i'm not sure why but there it is. 04:39:22 Okay, but don't mix me with the other retards, I'm legitimately asking a question in there, no hidden agenda or prosecution lol. 04:39:31 all the parrots come out 04:39:45 Question is simple... Since when is the AGPLv3 source code you mention available? Before or after binaries? 04:39:51 well you'v obiiously been told some nonsence because you've joined in with it 04:40:06 No, retard. 04:40:19 I'm not going to ask the question a third time. 🤷‍♂️ 04:40:21 well it depends retard, for apks there is a workflow in github 04:40:48 That's for building, you autistic cunt loo. 04:40:55 so they built every time, and it was probably a mix and match on the others 04:41:11 haha 04:41:13 That's for building, you autistic cunt lol. 04:41:15 ok now im enjoying this 04:41:37 what a major U turn you guys have pulled off 04:41:39 And he still has not answered the question! 04:42:33 What ultimatum? Holy shit 😂. 04:42:57 woodser pretty much being the only one not influenced by any of this shit clearly 04:43:02 mm? 04:43:05 I'm assuming your proactive avoidance of the question means the code only became available after you pulled the binaries? 04:43:09 yeah its hilarious 04:43:33 you've got your pretty corrupt team pretty much it seems 04:43:35 serhack if you're around shoot me a message 04:43:42 you only made a big deal of these binaries at the end 04:43:59 smart choice but not smart enough clearly 04:44:13 ??? Siren what is he on about? 04:44:23 I have no idea 04:44:27 Lol, I'm done trying to have a conversation with him. 04:44:43 :D 04:45:22 You are incorrect. The CCS proposal will be terminated because we've been made aware of additional code that is being withheld from public view and correct licensing until payout as leverage for the payouts to be made. This is not acceptable and rule 4 of the CCS states all code must be FOSS'd at all times at all stages. 04:46:06 not really , your reqest for the source was terminates because I saw through your utter shit 04:46:09 not really , your reqest for the source was terminated because I saw through your utter shit 04:46:11 This has been explained to you thoroughly. There is no corruption here. It's laughable that asking people who are using our system to follow the system's rules is being called 'corruption' 04:46:50 it sure feels like it after spending 4 months building an app 04:46:56 yeah 04:47:15 what else can explain this behaviour other than a ploy 04:47:26 This can https://ccs.getmonero.org/what-is-ccs/ 04:47:33 the feed back for ages was generally positive 04:47:38 If you mean our behavior 04:47:43 the "ultimatum" in question is that he follows the rules and FOSS everything immediately or the proposal can't continue. Thems the rules. 04:47:54 you then switched the agenda very quick 04:48:10 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Foss it or toss it 04:48:24 Toss it for sure 04:48:49 There is no way on earth I am giving it out 04:48:51 > I dont really have it in me to finish this for now. Dealing with some personal issues. 04:48:53 > 04:48:55 > This project has also attracted attention of some nasty people I would rather not have messaging me, apologies for the obscurity. Closed until firther notice 04:48:57 > 04:48:59 > Kewbit 04:49:01 The binaries thing is a secondary issue, and honestly not worth talking about much imo. The larger issue is that there is unreleased, non-public code that is being used as leverage. 04:49:03 the idea has completely gone with the wind 04:49:05 like completely 04:49:07 https://github.com/KewbitXMR/haveno-app 04:49:09 fireice pulled this back in the day to a lesser degree (at least that code was "source available" which led to the rule in the first place, if you all recall 04:49:23 fireice pulled this back in the day to a lesser degree (at least that code was "source available") which led to the rule in the first place, if you all recall 04:49:35 yeah fork it , it's like 1% of the project lol 04:50:08 I wasn't aware of this issue until today when it was discussed with me, at which point I contacted you to clear the situation up. The situation was made clear, and the options presented. You chose to not FOSS, so the proposal will not move forward. 04:50:09 I'm pointing out to what the readme says, that's it. 04:50:16 Case in point 04:50:33 yeah made clear quite a while ago 04:50:48 when we chatted! 04:51:34 Indeed. Everything is clear to me, don't worry. Just defending our side against the whining and accusations. 04:51:47 You're free to whine here (to a point), and I'm free to present my side of the story just as much. 04:51:55 I will share the news actually on about this 04:52:09 I've decided it's that big enough of a scam 04:52:33 I have a question, did you or did you not read the rules before you made the proposal? 04:52:59 Though I think cancelling the CCS right away might not be the right choice here. I suggest inspecting what was delivered (if the mistake was corrected already and the source is available) and if it's good just let this be a warning for this time. 04:53:53 Because an exception was made for a movie proposal before. Again on the licence rule. 04:53:55 I appreciate having seen everyone for who they are today, I have after all entered a world of criminals, should not have been so niave! or such an austic cunt I think as rotten said 04:54:17 I spoke with both luigi and plowsof, after my discussion with kewbit and presented them options. It's been decided that we are sticking to the rules of the CCS and not bending them. Those rules have been around for years, and they are very clear. 04:54:40 I can make rule 4 in all caps for future proposers :) 04:54:51 Oh fuck the licence rule, I wish I had been malicious now, would have got a bargain for my buck, but sadly you got it wrong this time and fucked it up for yourrself 04:54:53 You still haven't answered the question. Did you or did you not read the rules before you made the proposal? 04:55:55 You have nobody to be mad at except yourself for either not reading or not abiding by the clearly stated rules in the CCS. 04:56:04 Yes I did, I had broke one of the rules, so it is indeed my fault, I'm not fussed about the money, I'm just glad you didnt manage to concience. me to hand over the surce with all that shit you tried on me 04:56:32 Yes I did, I had broke one of the rules, so it is indeed my fault, I'm not fussed about the money, I'm just glad you didnt manage to convince me to hand over the source with all that shit you tried on me 04:56:35 Feel free to upload the entire chat into a pastebin and share here. I have nothing to hide and stand by everything I said in our discussion. 04:56:50 You do actually 04:57:08 You pretty much started the conversatiion with a polite threat, right off the bat 04:57:46 The way you approached me seemed reasonable at first 04:58:01 I'm sure you were being cautious for that purpose 04:58:51 You did do a relatively 'good job' of making yourself look goood until the end tho 04:59:24 Do you mind if I share the entire conversation then? 04:59:33 if that's your way of shoftening your own blow sure 04:59:48 Do as you please buddy 04:59:49 Diego Salazar: milestone are paid on an individual basis, before other milestones are completed, no? 05:00:02 and thanks again for ruining a community project 05:00:21 because you cannot be trusted, you're a lair. 05:00:39 And lugi1111 05:00:40 I mean what I said, I entered the conversation with the intention to learn and with an incomplete story given by several people. Over the course of our conversation I learned what was going on, and I adjusted my stances. 05:00:41 There the fuck that 2000xmr bro 05:00:49 Of was it lost buddy 05:00:55 No woodser. Rule 4 says: All work must be licensed permissively at all stages of the proposal. There is no time where your work can be licensed under a restrictive license (even as you're working on it). Your proposal will be terminated if this is not remedied. 05:01:06 sorry to here that the community lost about 200k foucking grande to your shit 05:01:23 how did fluffy and binarybyte not see through this shit 05:02:09 are they in this shit or IRC 05:02:17 imma get at least one of them 05:02:42 get some fucking rational conversation going for a at least a little while 05:03:00 luigi1111: you're being summoned. luigi1111 too 05:03:14 binaryFate: binaryfate 05:03:17 No I am not summoning luigi111 ih'es fucking in on it 05:03:19 sadly 05:03:29 Diego Salazar: my question is not in regards to licensing, but in regards to milestones being completed sequentially. they’re paid out before subsequent milestones are released, no? 05:03:34 fluffypony isn't part of the core team anymore 05:03:59 so you've basically corrupt the entire community ecosystem and fucked the whole coin then 05:04:09 silently stealing money over the years 05:04:28 literally from people in these chats 05:04:30 mugs 05:04:33 especially luigi1111 05:04:48 This would be the case, until it was learned that there is more code for other milestones that has not been FOSS'd SPECIFICALLY to use as a hedge for receiving payouts. This is not acceptable, and not a game we're interested in paying. 05:04:52 crpyto attack on the general fund 05:04:56 my ass! 05:05:05 me personally? goodness I'm good then. 05:05:27 the community need to figure out SOME kind of way of ousting luigi1111 and Diego out like seriously 05:05:29 and fast 05:05:57 I'm hopeful they dont have the getmonero.org domain in their possession 05:06:01 Diego Salazar: kewbit: I suggest cooling off for now because the discussion isn't constructive and let the community vote the next meeting. 05:06:29 I don’t see how that’s relevant to completing milestones with a permissive license. developers are free to publish subsequent milestones when they are ready, no? 05:06:36 not at all, I will literally keep at it until you're seen for your true fucking colours dude 05:06:41 I am completely cool and in control of myself, but I am happy to disengage. 05:06:43 kewbit may I have a moment please? 05:07:12 Machiavellian and cheating, whereeverr you feel like you've got a shot at it you take it 05:07:26 yeah sorry 05:07:46 nice to get that on off my chest, thank you. 05:07:52 nice to get that one off my chest, thank you. 05:08:05 <3​21bob321:monero.social> dankon siren finger on the pulse 05:08:42 and I do appreciate the support woodser but there is no sense here, the room is a bit of a facade 05:09:16 Monerobull I havent actually heard much from you, are you around at the moment 05:09:51 I would like to hear his take on this, please 05:11:17 look whoever is responsible for the getmonero.org domain we need to make sure they are not corrput next 05:11:26 this is my word of advice idk who that is 05:14:32 Honestly, for the sake of at least those who were stolen from I will seek remedy 05:14:46 not fucking clue how yet 05:15:14 * sneurlax wakes up 05:15:18 He seems good at dodging questions, haha. 05:16:53 yeah ive basically just gone on a rampage after diego set a precedence that this whole time I was a scammer 05:17:33 kewbit shared a private github to me personally prior to release so it was technically available ... you have to ask. available is compliant, you can for example charge $20 to mail them a cd/usb of the source. or so i've been told 05:17:49 i didn't do a full review but it looked right... fwiw... 05:17:50 anyone with 2 brain cells could figure out I'm just trying to make some software and contribute something, get paid back from some donors. 05:18:04 It was perfect really 05:18:05 i'm not saying the bins are/were safe but there's lots of code already done was my point. 05:18:20 i dont know what the fuck he ruined it all for, everyone literally would have won 05:18:29 its was a win win win setup 05:18:50 im past all that trying to prove myself bro 05:18:54 honestly 05:19:09 Don't listen to what sneurlax is saying! He's just a sleepy big pokemon who hasn't even washed his face yet! 05:19:22 I'm just now trying to get the idiots that havent yet realised, that luigi and dieigo are just scamming 05:19:33 😂😂😂 05:19:37 well so am I 05:19:47 actually I was inspirated by mew 05:19:51 I am a custom pokemon 05:20:04 kewbit you're not getting too far if you keep doing what you're doing... I'm just letting you know, my good friend. 05:20:14 wtf 05:20:31 you've just switched back to normal again 05:20:31 Does this message say kewbit or sneurlax? 05:20:48 you spastic 05:20:50 I was literally dispatched by luigi and plowsof to get an understanding of the situation, and I did so. I reported back and they gave me an answer. 05:20:51 Take a break, you sound unhinged and whiny... 05:20:53 I am literally paid to be the messenger boy that people get mad at. :P 05:20:58 i am pissed bro 05:21:03 @r​ottenwheel:kernal.eu: yes 05:21:11 but selttling 05:21:23 imagine working yo ASS off for 4 months 05:21:32 😴 05:21:58 and ultimately just get nothing be a pile of shit when the first milestone is done, ready to go and literally, ap would have been delivered TODAY 05:22:08 if I had just been paid for my milestone 05:22:23 It wouldnt have been perfect but the builds would have matched 05:22:45 nhh man thats just rude 05:22:59 Let's create a bot that spits rule 4 every hour for the next 24-48 hrs. until whiny Karen gets it... 05:23:33 no getting it is not what I need 05:23:35 I got it back in the convo with Deigo 05:24:14 as discussed privately, literally all that needs to be done is FOSSing of the current work, including WIP work, and the proposal can proceed. There is zero question in anyone's mind (and I suspect your own as well) that you will be paid for work done 05:24:47 but you are choosing to cling to an error out of some misguided 'principle of the thing' 05:25:08 i guess plowsoff hasnt had enough leverage to give an opinion yet, you still got this one on a leash? 05:25:54 recall I went to the maintainers of the CCS (plowsof and luigi) for an answer on how to proceed forward, I did not come up with it myself. 05:25:59 the only fucking seemingly genuine person here 05:26:05 besides woodser 05:26:18 I am leashed to them, not the other way around 05:26:22 yeah bro 05:26:22 sheesh still getting caught up. i see "source available" was explicitly covered lol, damn... 05:26:24 sure 05:26:41 not avail 05:26:46 unavail 05:29:18 It is also normal to be losing their shit after putting in months of work and getting cancelled because of this mistake. Rules are clear but I imagine this person has been picking up on public tenders or working with the gov: https://kewbit.org/hire-me/ 05:29:19 So it may be normal that he doesn't understand licensing or didn't expect the CCS rule to be there. 05:29:56 > <@rottenwheel:kernal.eu> Take a break, you sound unhinged and whiny... 05:29:57 It is also normal to be losing their shit after putting in months of work and getting cancelled because of this mistake. Rules are clear but this person has been picking up on public tenders or working with the gov: https://kewbit.org/hire-me/ 05:29:59 So it may be normal that he doesn't understand licensing or didn't expect the CCS rule to be there. His previous work experience didn't require him to understand FOSS licensing probably. 05:30:48 > <@rottenwheel:kernal.eu> Take a break, you sound unhinged and whiny... 05:30:49 It is also normal to be losing their shit after putting in months of work and getting cancelled because of this mistake. Rules are clear but this person has been picking up on public tenders or working with the gov: https://kewbit.org/hire-me/ 05:30:51 So it may be normal that he doesn't understand licensing or didn't expect the CCS rule to be there. Their previous work experience didn't require him to understand FOSS licensing probably. 05:31:15 Cloudflare... 05:31:26 My nervous tick is back! Thanks! 05:32:31 https://matrix.monero.social/_matrix/media/v1/download/kernal.eu/mRwTeViuSDxvYxSiRYdWJRZE 05:34:11 yeah gotta change that now obviously 05:35:19 His projects on GitHub are open source but they lack licenses also 05:35:33 I agree with the options given to kewbit (which may or may not be open still, ive not read the back log). If we care about public relations, trying to keep it professional here would be beneficial 05:37:05 His projects on GitHub are open source but they lack licenses also https://github.com/KewbitXMR?tab=repositories 05:37:07 Not much experience overall. So it could be lack of knowledge more than malice. 05:37:20 The thing is though that nobody is TRYING to withhold money. The rule is easily followed by FOSSing current work, and then there is literally no issue. 05:38:23 No, I literrally LITERALLY did that 05:38:27 with milestone 1 05:38:49 so thats not enough alone 05:39:04 clearly it wasnt going to be be enough 05:40:42 Stop making vague mafia threats to devs 05:41:37 I'll have to catch up on the chat in a bir 05:42:06 The european shift is beginning 05:42:16 rottenwheel, 05:42:21 try me 05:42:32 give it your best 05:42:46 Vague what? 05:43:06 Where the fuck is the 'vague mafia threat' in there? Are you out of your mind? 05:43:32 rotten you're in no position 05:43:36 monerobull @monerobull:monero.social explain yourself with a quote. 05:43:38 to be raided right now 05:43:48 I know that for a fact 05:44:55 "kewbit you're not getting too far if you keep doing what you're doing... I'm just letting you know, my good friend." 05:44:57 This is exactly the messahe you quote replied to, claiming it was a "vague mafia threat". Where is the "threat"? Explain yourself or retract your libel, bull. 05:45:07 "kewbit you're not getting too far if you keep doing what you're doing... I'm just letting you know, my good friend." 05:45:09 This is exactly the message you quote replied to, claiming it was a "vague mafia threat". Where is the "threat"? Explain yourself or retract your libel, bull. 05:46:05 rotten you're literallt fuckign doxxed 05:46:22 Lmfao this... individual for lack of a better word, reads: you're not getting too far if you keep doing what you're doing and he loses his marbles and claims it is a mafia threat. Fuck off monerobull @monerobull:monero.social 05:46:34 or at least were at one point 05:46:58 I told you to go take a break two hours ago my dude... 05:47:30 Now you are making the mafia threats 🫠 05:49:24 im not going to paste it 05:49:51 but out of all the people in here hes the one that needs to be sat the fuck down 05:50:31 You'd get banned 05:50:44 its not my style 05:50:54 I would expect nothing less 05:53:03 <0​xfffc:monero.social> anybody is aware of a VPS provider service like https://servers.guru/ but with risc-v support? 05:53:37 That's a good question... 🤔 05:54:24 SBC diy farm? 05:55:00 try https://kyun.host ? 05:55:15 just got a RISC-V laptop in literally today 05:57:21 <3​21bob321:monero.social> which ccs is the issue about? 05:57:46 it's too slow. :( not yet ready for desktop primetime 05:58:26 <0​xfffc:monero.social> I see. Just want to make sure some of our tests running on risc-v without any issue. 05:58:42 https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/489 06:02:18 I think regardless of whether or not that rule "technically" forces you to publish everything as you're writing it, the rule is pretty unambiguous (in spirit and in letter) that in order to receive milestone benefits, you need to have *result* publicly available under a permissive license. A milestone is definitely a "stage of the proposal" 06:03:43 My brain feels normal to here something locally sound again, thank you! 06:05:16 But is that really worth using to ruin a project over 06:07:26 <3​21bob321:monero.social> you bascially need to publish your work so people can verify 06:07:32 kewbit: so is the source code of the work you are claiming under the first milestone still not publicly available? 06:07:44 Yes I agree 06:07:55 Woodser and I have been discussing, and his reasoning of "rules as written" is talking on permissive licensing and not on withholding code" is somewhat swaying for me. 06:07:57 My current thinking is to potentially ask for the milestone to be paid out, but an amendment be added to rule 4 regarding publishing work on a reasonable, ongoing basis. 06:08:19 Honestly your wording is inflammatory at best but if we are result oriented, no. But you must publish complete source code of the milestone you are trying to claim. You will never get paid without this. 06:08:38 That makes 100% sense, which is why I not only did that, I wrote an article on my blog on how to interface with the API so even if you were not taht much into development you could have folllowed it to 06:08:39 That makes 100% sense, which is why I not only did that, I wrote an article on my blog on how to interface with the API so even if you were not taht much into development you could have folllowed it too 06:08:41 I wanted to go the extra mile 06:08:46 Because I enjoyed this 06:08:59 No. The work for this milestone is FOSS'd. The issue is that it has come to light that large swaths of code for future milestones are not FOSS's, specifically to be used as leverage to ensure future milestones are paid, which is not in the spirit of the CCS. 06:09:19 What are you talking about furture milestones for? 06:09:26 <3​21bob321:monero.social> so whats the issue then 06:09:31 What are you talking about future milestones for, you havent even settled this one? 06:09:52 of course there is no chance of a future miletstone if you cant settle the first 06:09:54 The argument made by woodser, which is the most compelling, is that the rules as written only speaks to licensing, not public availability, and that technically anyone writing any character and not pushing immediately is in violation. 06:10:00 what were you expecting 06:10:38 dont tell me you're finally only starting to see sense now 06:11:06 My guy. Do you not remember, me literally thinking you should be getting paid for milestone 1 and bringing that to the maintainers? 06:11:31 My guy. Do you not remember, me literally thinking you should be getting paid for milestone 1 and bringing that to the maintainers on your behalf? 06:11:39 Why having a milestone system in place, if you dont want to operate it correctly? 06:12:00 I brought it to them, and after some discussion amongst us, I was swayed by the discussion on the spirit of the CCS being collaborative. 06:12:02 <3​21bob321:monero.social> so how is it "licensed permissively" if its not committed to a repo 06:12:05 Please just give me a rational explanation to this 06:12:14 <3​21bob321:monero.social> going off trust 06:12:33 <3​21bob321:monero.social> is this the issue ? 06:12:58 After speaking to woodser, I'm partially swayed by him as well. I'm not trying to be wishy washy. The truth of the matter is that there was an oversight in the wording of rule 4 that gives you a technicality to stand on. And I am mostly in agreement that 'rules as written' should probably be followed which would give you pay out 06:13:06 It's incredibly inneffeint if I were to say, make a commit to github every time I change one character ? 06:13:16 its ludicrus 06:13:38 the github would be a complete mess 06:13:46 Okay I'm seeing where the actual disagreement is. I was under the impression that the source code for the current miletsone wasn't FOSS'd, which would make the discussion a lot more clear cut 06:13:50 <3​21bob321:monero.social> so was it committed to github when you made milestone 1 claim? 06:14:03 My suggestion is that an amendment to rule 4 be added for future proposals. Something along the lines of: "All WIP is expected to be uploaded to appropriate channels on a reasonable ongoing basis for public viewing." 06:14:08 Your concern should be, is the work getting done, yes or no, is what he producing working yes or no 06:14:10 that said, I understand that such wording would not affect current proposals 06:14:28 <3​21bob321:monero.social> ? 06:14:43 Not, of has it been 10 days yet, or should I force this particular indivudual to do all of his milestones at once 06:16:10 <3​21bob321:monero.social> i think its obvious. If its not public you cant claim cause how do people know you did the work? 06:17:07 yes its called a fallacy 06:17:12 Dan 06:17:27 <3​21bob321:monero.social> its called hear say your honor 06:17:35 Right. But again, what makes things murky is that the code for the first milestone that he has submitted is both public and permissively licensed. In this sense it is eligible for payout. 06:17:37 The eye-roll happens when kewbit admits in several rooms that there are large parts of code that he has completed for other milestones that he is withholding from public viewing specifically for the reason of leverage to ensure he gets paid for future milestones, because he doesn't trust the CCS. 06:18:01 it's literally non-sense aimed at producting a certain result from the css proposer 06:18:11 should be better worded 06:18:17 or more elebroate 06:18:26 <3​21bob321:monero.social> thats fine. Gets paid per milestone 06:18:37 because you cause just stick that one up anyones ass 06:18:42 It is fair for him to not release the code until payout for the previous milestone that he did not receive. It is not good to be releasing proprietary binaries still. 06:19:11 <3​21bob321:monero.social> oh 06:19:13 But the problem is not as bad since it wasn't the binaries for the milestones he was at 06:19:17 And I would apologies for it if you wasnt such a cunt earlier 06:19:19 But the problem is not as bad since it wasn't the binaries for the milestone he was at 06:19:25 correct. The binaries are a secondary thing and don't factor into the discussion, honestly. 06:19:31 me? 06:19:34 <3​21bob321:monero.social> language people 06:19:45 <3​21bob321:monero.social> dankon everyone 06:19:48 I was referring to Siron 06:19:55 gotcha 06:20:36 But instead of independent t thought, it was a bandwagon notion, not something I'd expect tbh 06:20:42 But instead of independent thoughts, it was a bandwagon notion, not something I'd expect tbh 06:21:16 For this reason, my own personal opinion as it stands now (fwiw, again I'm not the CCS maintainer) has changed slightly due to my conversation with woodser. I now take my original thought again that kewbit should be paid out for the first milestone under rules as written. But that a new clause should be added to rule 4 to prevent such cringe from happening again. 06:21:53 that's all fine, but I am still only releasing every milestone now 06:22:01 period 06:22:06 The purpose of rule 4 was to prevent scams and encourage collaboration. If an entire milestone is mostly done, but the person gets hit by a bus, all work needs to be redone. It also presupposes other people can jump in to help on the work, paid or not. 06:22:17 if you deem that to be unreasonable I dont care for this one 06:22:31 I'm already over it geneuinly 06:22:39 If you want this now figure it out for your community 06:22:42 if we go with rules as currently written, there is a strong argument to be made here, yes. 06:22:46 and make it work 06:23:53 I don't care about your apology. I was mostly being defensive, even if you did violate the rule for the current milestone my opinion was it should result in a warning not cancellation because exceptions were made before. 06:24:10 As long as that is crystal clear, payment each milestone. despite thoroughly pissing me off all day, I might still accept it. 06:24:21 Many people asked you what happened and you didn't bother clarifying and dodged all the questions 06:24:24 I know you are (or were, since you said you're over it) extremely upset. But it would behoove you to not shoot the messenger. Once again, I brought the suggestion to core to pay for the milestone. 06:24:29 I need some air 06:24:32 brb 06:25:16 Grab an English book too 06:26:52 also, in case you missed it, I shot you a DM after my discussion with woodser saying I'd be willing to bring that up for discussion with them again and potentially get the three of you in a room to discuss if you'd like. Despite your personal, directed antagonism. 06:26:53 I couldnt think of an excuse for it, only the one I originally made clear it was just for the people who wanted to test, I was even advising against using their machine they could use virtual box or emulators to make myself regarded as more ingenious on the idea that there could potentially be virus in there 06:27:34 I definitely made that clear it was even clearly written in the README on the front page of the repo today before pausing it 06:28:04 dude, you literally suck 06:29:02 <3​21bob321:monero.social> less combative would be better for you. 06:29:25 do what you want man, I'm not expecting nothing at this rate 06:29:51 that was an accidental double negative 06:29:53 im tired 06:30:09 meh, I mean if you don't care then I won't care 06:30:19 hey, I care! 06:30:26 no I you guys need to learn respect 06:30:28 ok sneurlax cares so I care 06:30:31 That means a lot to me 06:30:58 in our entire conversation, I have spoken calmly and have not disrespected you, as far as I know. 06:31:02 If I dont have your respect, I couldnt care less, something I thought I had earned over time 06:31:20 I stood firm on something, yes. But just because we disagreed doesn't make it disrespectful. 06:31:21 I think that this amendment especially makes sense for "hourly" work or other work without clearly defined deliverables. Bus factor + sense of collaboration is especially important if you're "on the payroll". But if your milestones have hard boundaries, I'd like to reward that, and be fine not applying this rule and having the work only need to be FOSS'd at each milestone. I think 06:31:23 the core premise of the CCS acknowledges that collaboration for the sake of collaboration is great, but people also need to pay the bills. On the other hand, why would you use CCS if you don't trust that they will pay out in the future? Also, at a more personal level, IMHO not open sourcing work for an open source payment protocol when raising funds through a crowdfunding system 06:31:25 is bad form. 06:31:31 clearly that means nothig to you filthy bandwagoners, fair play to those that had their own opinions 06:32:14 siron = scum 06:32:15 rotton = scum 06:32:30 sneurlax = ???? 06:32:42 bum 06:32:47 BUM 06:32:58 bum 06:33:08 ok then 06:33:15 whatever same differnce 06:33:35 perhaps the community has indeed changed then. Something similar happened with fireice back in the day, don't know who remembers that or not. 06:33:39 I didn't even get air yet ffs 06:33:43 Didn't you need some air? 06:33:52 And were going to brb? 06:34:00 The authors of all these packages, yes? https://github.com/KewbitXMR/haveno-app/blob/main/pubspec.lock 06:34:01 You need to learn to respect their terms. 06:34:07 What happened with fireice? 06:34:21 the what? 06:34:31 fireice released code for his proposal as "unlicensed" as it was WIP. Publicly viewable, but not permissive. Core team ruled this was not in the spirit of the CCS, and the proposal was cancelled as he refused to FOSS until payment. 06:34:41 This literally led to the creation of rule 4 06:35:02 ... And RYO? Lol. 06:35:03 but I havent unlicenced it at any point in time 06:35:20 If you're going to accuse at lease setup some kind of monotring system 06:35:30 If you're going to accuse at least setup some kind of monitring system 06:35:33 that's the technicality at play here, yes 06:35:53 I dont understand the issue 06:36:06 tbh I stilll dont 100% understand most licences 06:36:24 I'm describing what happened before that led to this rule. If fireice had instead said he has code but won't reveal it until he's paid, rule 4 might have covered that edge case 06:36:26 Just that it's important to you guys that I make this AGPLv3 06:36:49 ive done that for everything in fact, it's my default licence for any project now 06:36:53 kewbit, my understanding is that your claim is that you have open sourced everything. but diego mentions that you have other code in reserve because you aren't confident that the CCS will pay? 06:36:53 dont know why just is 06:37:26 I guess I'm just nothing thinking about certain semantice the same way you think about them 06:37:30 You cannot distribute proprietary binaries without the license information for these libraries and source code (if you included a GPL or AGPL dependency). Which is what you did. 06:37:33 I guess I'm just nothing thinking about certain semantics the same way you think about them 06:37:45 This is unrelated to the CCS policy but still an asshole move 06:38:11 And I do appreciate you telling me that in which case we can resolve 06:38:20 you know, with a bit of teamwork? 06:38:34 There are two kinds of licenses, both are generally considered to be FOSS. Those two kinds are permissive and copyleft. 06:38:35 Permissive means you can mostly do what you want with very few restrictions (mostly give attribution to the original author). 06:38:37 Copyleft means anything utilizing that library must be published under the SAME license. 06:38:39 What this means in real-world terms is that for-profit corporations and companies can use permissive licenses and close-source them and their changes. If they used copyleft, they would have to make large portions of their code ALSO copyleft (i.e. open source) and they don't want to do that because it would lead to more competition and less revenue. 06:38:41 or do we not do that here 06:38:43 Oh I'm 100% on the "licensed permissively" aspect of the rule when it comes to claiming compensation for work. But I'm unsure whether work for milestones for which the proposer isn't claiming payouts for, and which clearly don't fall under that milestone, should have to be FOSS'd 06:39:12 Siren he calls you scum and then asks for teamwork, somewhere in between claimed we don't respect him. 06:39:25 He does need a break... 06:39:35 There is something I'm missing here there must be. TO BE CLEAR EVERYTHING IS AGPLV3 06:39:39 Read my message again, it tells you exactly what not to do. 06:39:49 the teamwork thing is literally what we're doing here in this chat isn't it? I for one am still trying to solve the problem. If I wasn't I would have just went to bed after the insults. :P 06:39:58 If however that needs to change, I can be advised 06:40:21 But not the already performed work for the proposal which is to be claimed in future milestones.... yeah? 06:40:26 And I change it to the chicken dance licence if you so wish, the licence is at your leisure not mine 06:40:29 This is indeed worth a 'meta issue' :P 06:40:46 s​iren:kernal.eu: I don't want to look, is it a haveno-app dependency in that pubspec that's GPL? 06:41:03 or from haveno/flutter_haveno? 06:41:20 if you use a GPL dependency then yeah, they disallow themselves from being used without the source being available 06:41:32 The only example I can give is using AGPLv3, monerobull was forcing me to, so I set it to that 06:41:57 I will have to build the UI onto of the software that licence which I guess also must be AGPLv3 06:42:05 It's not about your code, it's about the dependencies that you have pulled. You need to comply with their licenses. 06:42:06 s/used/distributed in bins as mentioned. 06:42:14 unless it contains binaries/ 06:42:15 unless it contains binaries? 06:42:17 This is actually copyleft. You should use MIT or BSD-3. 06:42:25 https://guptadeepak.com/open-source-licensing-101-everything-you-need-to-know/ 06:42:27 Ok I need to understand more about licences, I get it now 06:42:48 well... i looked at the pubspec and they're all common packages, mostly mit, and i don't want to look every one up, so if the claim is that one is gpl, just link it 06:42:48 though this is not the issue being discussed and would have been easily resolved without grumbling, I'm sure 06:43:04 I actually dont know enough about it, so I probably need to be advised and we discuss if there is to be a new repo what licence I should render it with 06:43:11 this isn't the issue being discussed 06:43:22 first, just showing source fixes all issues regardless of licensing, right? 06:43:27 or at least not the one I'm discussing 06:43:32 https://libera.monerologs.net/monero-community/20241022#c449067 06:43:39 sneurlax: even if it's MIT nowhere in the app is an acknowledgement of the lib used and it's license. And the binary was not distributed with the license info either. 06:43:57 you can see all the sources from the pubspec 06:44:03 sneurlax: even if it's MIT nowhere in the app is an acknowledgement of the lib used and its license. And the binary was not distributed with the license info either. 06:44:05 even now I wont complicate that 06:44:19 I'll give you the live one 06:44:23 up to date .yml 06:44:37 I cannot ensure your release had the same pubsec as the public repo since your binary was proprietary 06:44:40 ok... i don't cite the licenses of every dependency i use either, sooo... i guess... i should... start doing that... 06:44:43 fwiw, I'll say it one more time, the issue kewbit currently has with the CCS maintainers has nothing to do with the binaries thing 06:44:56 What's your solution? 06:45:02 if you already understand this then carry on 06:45:55 You want this completeless trustless, it's ideal for you but it's not compatible with a milstone structure is it? 06:46:01 Read the fucking license it's two paragraphs if MIT 06:46:08 You want this completely trustless, it's ideal for you but it's not compatible with a milstone structure is it? 06:46:35 I fucking will, you you're literally useless so stfu from now on 06:47:11 I will read MIT, what else? 06:47:13 🤦 06:47:57 There is no incompatibility. I understand the confusion and have since the beginning. Your read of the milestone system is that it's there for the protection of the proposer. To ensure they have a failsafe and can get paid for prior milestones, even if future milestones are withheld. 06:47:59 To my understanding (I could be wrong) this is not the intent of the milestones. 06:48:18 I dont mind if like sneurlax insults me cause at least hes got a bit of banter at the best of times but who the fuck even are you Siron 06:48:26 I dont mind if like sneurlax insults me cause at least hes got a bit of banter at the best of times but who the fuck even are you Siren 06:48:34 The milestones are actually for the community's protection. So we don't pay everything out up front and potentially get exit scammed. But it also benefits the proposer because it ensures they don't have to do a year's worth of work before getting paid. 06:48:34 "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all 06:48:34 copies or substantial portions of the Software." 06:48:48 when I flutter pub get the repo, it downloads the source and its LICENSE file as well 06:49:39 It was never meant to be a "I don't trust the CCS" trump card, as the thought was that if the CCS and its maintainers aren't trusted to give payouts, why would the individual use it at all? 06:50:32 I was conditioned into that 06:50:38 I wont explain why 06:51:09 becasue I have respect for who advised me 06:51:14 end of convo on that 06:51:19 glad I listened 06:51:25 In simpler terms, the milestone system is there mostly for the community's protection, and generally makes a more palatable contract for both sides. That it gives a proposer some peace of mind when dealing with the system is a side benefit, but not the main reason for its existence. 06:51:42 kewbit, I do think the fatal misstep here really was just publishing binaries because in that case, it's correct, there wasn't acknowledgement there. whereas just publishing the source, if someone builds it, the "substantial copy" of the code downloads the packages and thus their licenses and so is compliant 06:51:42 Milestone systems work great 06:51:53 You can literally divide the risk up into small pieces 06:52:15 thats the point, I would even be happy as long as if everyone else agrees to further split them 06:52:36 These how real contracts work typically 06:52:55 It's a model that is effective 06:53:26 Which is why I was originally quite happy when I asked about it, I put less risk up front 06:53:28 also i know siren does good work in the ecosystem so no need to insult a hopeful coworker, eh? 06:53:36 It made everything seem more legitimate 06:53:52 I was specifically responding to the comment of incompatibility between trustlessness of the proposer and the milestone system, which I outlined why that was incorrect :) 06:53:53 Until... yeah.. 06:53:58 and my questions about what we should acknowledge are for my benefit as well as i hope they are for establishing standards that can help kewbit come into line with expectations. 06:54:55 The conversation is getting muddied here because kewbit is under fire for two different, unrelated things atm. 06:54:57 Guy's I really mean it, at this point I'm still out. 06:54:59 I literally need to be convinced now 06:55:14 Whetther that's something you care to do I really doubt 06:55:35 As long as milestones system is in place as normal 06:55:41 That's a good start 06:56:12 the convincing is that many of us have been through hell and back for and with monero and its community. I have, rotten, fluffypony, etc etc. 06:56:13 But we're still here because that sad truth is, in regards to financial privacy, there is only Monero. 06:56:34 yes, and here we go again 06:56:46 I am not everyone else 06:57:09 clearly or I woudlnt be entertaining a 7 hour painful conversation 06:58:01 Yeah there is only monero and wonnero 06:58:38 that's why I'm here, I see the value, but im trying really hard to to see the value in this CCS process right now 06:59:07 I know you see the value. I know that's why you're here. Same for me. I've been the wringer more times than I can count. :P 06:59:13 we're trying to iron out a wrinkle in our current process 06:59:38 then we need to do that and stop just talking about it 06:59:59 nohing in terms of processes has changed since I've been here 07:00:02 has it plowsof? 07:00:05 Idk 07:00:32 I'm sure we covered very similiar arguments to which we came to the same general conclusions before 07:00:51 Correct, hence my current thought process that your current proposal should continue on with rules as written (i.e. you get payout and can release code as FOSS per milestone right before payout). 07:00:53 But at the same time we add a clause the rule 4 that says for future proposals (will NOT apply to current proposals) WIP code should be uploaded for public viewing (and permissively licensed) on a reasonable ongoing basis. 07:00:55 near starting 07:01:28 Meaning you continue on with your current proposal unimpeded. And if you're not down with the new terms for future proposals, you can find alternative methods of funding. 07:01:29 I am happy to submit right before payout 07:01:32 These are my current thoughts. 07:01:38 I've already done that with the protocol 07:01:42 no complaints 07:02:30 It seems we are aligned then. You and I, at least. 07:02:35 I really don't care much about the binaries thing. 07:02:41 thanks fuck for that 07:02:47 thank fuck for that 07:03:11 We have to care about binaires for f-droid though, or it simply wont compile 07:03:29 Again, my apologies if I've seemed wishy washy. First for you, then not so much, then back for you again. This situation has highlighted an oversight in our current system, and I've been gathering opinions and thinking on it all day. 07:03:37 my understanding its thats why they are sought out 07:04:00 but that's no worries snerlax can assist with that in his free time :) 07:04:03 You're just the unfortunate person that brought that oversight to light. 07:04:21 well lets make it have been productive then at least? 07:04:41 cast it in iron somewhere 07:05:07 I will bring this suggestion to the CCS maintainers. 07:05:09 bringing oversight into the light can be a delight. 07:05:34 luigi1111: ^ plowsof ^ btw read dis 07:05:39 just my opinion 07:07:16 But at the same time we add a clause the rule 4 that says for future proposals (will NOT apply to current proposals) WIP code should be uploaded for public viewing (and permissively licensed) on a reasonable ongoing basis. 07:07:17 I think this shows reasonable understanding for this instance, I am convinced we now may be able to finish this 07:07:54 on a reasonable ongoing basis. this needs to be added to your CSS guidlines 07:08:13 Good. Then I hope you rescind your screeching about me being a scammer who's trying to take down Monero 07:08:17 reasonable can be 1-2 to weeks ? 07:08:34 in mind, if not explicitly voiced, at least ;) 07:08:36 i wasnt forcing, AGPLv3 was :D 07:09:03 contingent on project dependancy complications of that particular project though, their may be exceptions to the rule 07:09:17 at the descretion of a decent explaination 07:09:34 The specifics of this are to be discussed in a future shouting match with a future proposal and unfortunate soul as we debate and cry about what constitutes "Reasonable" 07:09:52 that being said, i dont want to take part in this convo, too early for licensing drama or whatever this is about, cya 07:10:27 no I think we've moved past licencing again for the 3rd time during this project 07:11:20 I will let you know if I think a new repo is appropriate based on code design, I think it should perhaps always be the core teams decision no the licence of that repo 07:11:28 Correct. Licensing was never the core issue, source availability for non-submitted work was. Thanks for staying on topic here. A bit hard to talk with the noise to signal ratio. 07:11:57 Alright. Since we seem to have a plan of action to move forward, I'll do what I can to discuss with the correct people involved. 07:12:06 ...tomorrow. It's 1 AM, and I'm quite tired. 07:12:10 yes but consider this, I was working too fast 07:12:15 Dealing with you all is the worst, but I wouldn't have it any other way. 07:12:17 you guys couldnt catch up as all 07:12:32 it was a bit of. a joke 07:12:33 you guys couldnt catch up at all 07:12:35 maybe thats in place for good reason 07:12:53 but it shouldnt vindicate or have to slow me down 07:13:30 so enforcing that rule can damage things unnecessarily in edge cases like mine 07:13:38 where I shot ahead 07:14:18 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> This doesn't exist already does it? : 'a remittance and international money transfer service end to end cheaper than current solutions (ex- tarnsferwise) but for Monero? for example: local currency A --> monero --> local currency B. with an option to keep a part in monero' 07:14:31 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> There isn't software that accomplishes this already does it? : 'a remittance and international money transfer service end to end cheaper than current solutions (ex- tarnsferwise) but for Monero? for example: local currency A --> monero --> local currency B. with an option to keep a part in monero' 07:14:38 it does not 07:14:39 <3​21bob321:monero.social> monero condom? 07:14:45 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> There isn't software that accomplishes this already does it? : 'a remittance and international money transfer service end to end cheaper than current solutions (ex- tarnsferwise) but for Monero? for example: local currency A --> monero --> local currency B. with an option to keep a part in monero' Thinking of developing a small proof of concept project with this idea 07:14:49 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> what do you mean 07:15:07 im not installing any software 07:15:20 you asked if that exists. It does not. At least not all in one neat package like TransferWise 07:15:22 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> ah okay thanks! 07:15:26 software installation is completely at my descrection 07:15:30 software installation is completely at my descresion 07:15:34 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> you don't have to just a potential proof of concept personal project 07:15:39 unless you provide a VM? 07:15:43 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> do you think its a worthwhile neat project? 07:16:04 Yes, but I think with current financial regulation it will take an astronomical amount of money to get off the ground. 07:16:08 I will doa. transferwise package 07:16:13 it's just HTML endpoints 07:16:17 <1​0934dfasl:matrix.org> It's juts proof of concept hypothetical really 07:16:19 The licensing that would be needed to be a money transfer agency is huge and difficult to get 07:16:33 I have it so my home assistant can send a few bux to familiy abroad 07:16:41 as a hypothetical, it about reaches one of the core pillars of what Monero has to offer the world. 07:17:24 ok conversation has switched 07:17:29 im dipping now 07:17:43 bye! 07:17:59 bye 07:18:29 well that was a day well spent 07:18:39 soft skills, finger on the pulse, yadda yadda 07:22:22 <3​21bob321:monero.social> fingering on the pulse* 09:11:57 Fyi this is incorrect. A project can have a stricter license (eg. AGPLv3) than its dependencies (eg. MIT). Vice versa does not work because complying with MIT terms alone is not enough for an AGPLv3 dependency. There is nothing wrong with the current license choice. 09:15:49 You're the only one throwing insults and shitting yourself over valid criticism 10:07:29 I scrolled for 40 seconds straight without finding the old messages I were at. Is there a tl;dr of woodser rule4 question 10:10:19 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Doesnt say WIP 11:04:38 I think it's fair to work on a future milestone in a "private" manner, if the honest intention is to release that code/deliverable permissively when the milestone is reached/made public. Not sure why the fuss, to be honest. 11:06:36 > Not sure why the fuss, to be honest 11:06:53 Welcome to #monero-community, where the most basic question turn into ennemies 11:07:03 fair 12:23:57 You are my enemy. 12:24:25 I love you. And you hate me. Therefore you are homophobic 12:24:33 Checkmates 12:25:09 Source? 😂 12:25:27 for real, no source 12:26:14 What makes you think I hate you bb? 😏 12:26:31 Also, since when you love me? 😳 12:26:53 the voices told me 12:31:01 I disagree with this 12:33:02 Claiming that someone has to upload WIP code is asinine 12:33:07 It seems that the English inside the AGPLv3 was completely forgotten 12:34:15 What is that, the new xmrgplv4? 12:34:35 idk what Diego was on about. Made no sense to me. Obeying AGPLv3 was the only issue. And I don’t see that being fixed. 12:35:10 you claim in the same breath that MIT is acceptable, and MIT has far fewer9 requirements than agplv3 12:36:24 Diego Salazar: 12:36:39 I love MIT 12:38:05 I-I'd like to interject for a moment https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#Expat 12:40:13 Interesting. Thanks you for this interject 12:40:41 I love ur mum. 12:41:20 Ignore the neckbeards. Make permissive licenses great again. MIT all the things! 12:41:32 Lol, someone is having an aneurism over that in two seconds. 12:45:04 <0​xfffc:monero.social> ofrnxmr: Ping 12:45:38 Pong. 12:45:40 Morning 0xfffc 12:46:02 <0​xfffc:monero.social> Check DM 12:55:27 rottenwheel: Can you PM me on the IRC side? 12:56:41 dEBRUYNE certainly. Let me log in and I'll shoot you a message in 5-10 minutes. Thanks! 13:40:40 monerobull: Does monero.town not properly federate with lemmy.cafe? My posts aren't showing up. 13:41:30 I posted a reply here: https://lemmy.world/post/21081111 13:41:32 this is a lemmy.cafe issue, not with town 13:41:44 https://matrix.monero.social/_matrix/media/v1/download/monero.social/xEJOQzhHRdTSerKyFBnpLvWq 13:41:53 https://matrix.monero.social/_matrix/media/v1/download/monero.social/dINHyPbYtwXxKsjkUOKXOgfm 13:43:11 Do you know of a Lemmy instance that properly federates with monero.town? 13:44:39 like lemmy.world? 13:46:57 Do you know if lemmy.world accounts can post OK on monero.town? 13:50:13 havent tested it 13:50:17 rottenwheel: can you? 13:50:28 oh lemmy.world 13:50:42 yeah should be fine 13:50:47 thats where most of the downvotes come from 13:50:55 lol ok 13:52:01 One answer to a probability theory question coming right up. 13:53:06 I need to "fill out an application" for lemmy.world. If only they would accept a nominal XMR fee 13:56:57 Ah ok. The application was just typing that I agree to terms of service. 14:03:04 monerobull: It looks like lemmy.world is having problems posting to monero.town. I am getting a spinning busy icon when I click "post" 14:03:52 hm 14:08:05 Well, can someone post this answer for me to https://monero.town/post/4707359 ? https://gist.githubusercontent.com/Rucknium/9268b8fcf8cbc44e3c43a029d98b6b6c/raw/e3d0607adc7c11f8fbcbb9ab40ded16364c40beb/multiple-blocks-probability.md 14:20:21 ooooohhhh 14:20:23 ruck i bet you are using tor right 14:20:50 it could be that federation requests include reaching out to the server yourself 14:21:08 so that might get blocked by the tor-ban on town 14:24:09 Maybe. About two months ago I posted from lemmy.cafe and it showed up OK. Lemmy got an update since then, right? 14:25:03 IMHO, get some funds to DigiLOL to set up an onion hidden service for monero.town with PoW anti-DDoS 14:26:45 yeah that might be a good idea 14:26:49 I need to be able to tell Towners when something important is coming up on MRL's agenda 14:29:38 Siren: Stnby can you please send me a quote for this :) 14:29:40 Siren: Stnby can you please send me a quote for this? :) 15:24:46 Anyone know anything abt the Japan thing? 15:27:17 apparently they busted these people and found out they used monero while investigating afterwards 15:27:22 so monero had nothing to do with the bust 15:46:10 That’s what I was thinking, but it was odd that they were claiming to be the first time that Monero was analyzed and used to identify a suspect 15:46:58 It’s not like this was the first time someone was busted that also happened to be using Monero; nor is it the largest amount 16:36:13 so kewbit was unfamiliar with licenses, but I think threatening to cancel his CCS because he was "withholding code" unrelated to his milestone is not a good look 16:37:27 maybe he was the one who made the threat first, but we shouldn't escalate or retaliate. he either open sources and gets his milestone paid or he doesn't. simple as that 16:43:06 also, "Because an exception was made for a movie proposal before. Again on the licence rule." <= wasn't an exception, this was for a marketing campaign. there were other marketing campaigns before, i.e. a monero-branded spinnaker for a racing boat and a few others 16:50:04 Artemisia was sick of this bullshit 16:50:19 and left the room 16:50:34 /s 16:50:42 hi 16:52:07 hi cat 16:52:38 does anyone else remember how Diego helped Vik open-source Cake, then proceeded to fork it and launch a competitor? 16:52:54 lmao that was a good one :) 16:53:01 I didn't fork cake? 16:53:21 Stack isn't a fork? 16:53:39 it isn't a fork of Cake, no. 16:53:44 pov you're geonic and embarassing yourself 16:53:50 lmao that was a good one indeed :) 16:53:57 'what do you want me to do?" 16:54:18 What do you want me to do? 16:54:46 what is it a fork of? 16:54:47 This is retarded. 16:55:02 I suspect the embarrassed part doesn't happen anymore. When you're consistently, confidently wrong it numbs you to the shame 16:55:10 Hey geonic, have you ordered your mini statue of Diego yet? 16:55:29 You've been obsessed with him for years, might as well... 16:55:56 Guy can't breath without this 'film director' garden gnome going after him. Ridiculous. 16:56:22 The new big thing in the street is that supposedly Stack wallet is a fork of something. 🤣 16:57:25 if Stack wallet is written from scratch I'll do 100 push-ups in Diego's honor :p 16:57:42 squats bro, not push ups 16:58:12 Shame, I was hoping you'd say you'd shut the fuck up for a month. Was getting excited. :( 16:58:28 just checked with my source, only a part of cake was forked but it's not being used anymore 16:58:48 I was not up to date on my info, apologies! 16:58:56 Stack was originally forked from a, now very defunct wallet, called PayMint or something. Trying to remember the exact name and I'll find the repo. 16:59:09 To this day, there isn't any paymint (or whatever it was called) code left in Stack 16:59:32 we just used it as a base so we didn't have to implement every single thing from scratch, but it ended up sucking so we replaced literally all of it 16:59:42 At present Stack is completely OG codebase 17:00:16 In the now, Cake uses code we make and we use code they make. 17:01:07 sounds like Monero and Firo, both fighting the good fight 17:02:32 anyways, maybe that's worth 50 push ups or so 17:02:47 leaning towards 0 17:03:04 but I mean, receiving licensing advice from the (only known) person who took Monero code without permission is kinda ironic 17:03:10 at least we're in agreement there, right? 17:03:36 lol, need to get at least one poke in per day 17:03:39 first one flopped, swap to another 17:04:07 didn't flop bro, you did use cake code for a good while 17:04:40 it completely flopped because you said I forked cake to launch a competitor XD 17:04:47 Bad faith in a nutshell 17:05:16 alright I'll do my 50 push-ups 17:05:20 And that's exactly how you meant it too, hence your apology (not to me, oh no, but to not being up to date on your info) 17:05:39 squats > pushups 17:06:27 You're a real piece of work, but Monero wouldn't be the same without your unique brand of vomit. 17:07:19 there was enough talk years ago that I still thought that stack was forked from cake 17:07:36 Goodness knows how many times you've spread literal BS about me that I wasn't there to actually get right. Like my own personal Brandolini's Law. 17:07:40 narrative changed, we didn't get the memo 17:08:21 there's nothing I could say about you that would eclipse how big of a douche bag you actually are 17:08:46 two peas in a pod we are 17:08:51 diego at least now you have the finger on the pulse 17:09:00 the = your 17:09:09 kewbit got that one right. diego is a bad actor and a known grifter 17:09:21 and he likes to wear core's clothes 17:09:46 how long is this going to go on for? 17:09:54 I just finished catching up 17:10:02 I've got another 5 minutes or 17:10:05 *or so 17:10:18 Pencil in my 'geonic time' a couple times a week 17:10:29 please add it to your transparency report 17:10:36 keeps me humble 17:10:59 diego and humble in the same sentence is peak irony 17:11:28 geonic: plz take your personal woes about Deigo's supposed douchbaggery to another channel, it gets very noisy in this channel which is supposed to be about work 17:11:32 eclipsed only by geonic and intelligent 17:11:43 imma just glad I started my day with a heart warming cat video 17:11:49 may I suggest others do the same 17:12:31 My bad for continuing the vitriol. Though I think my response to the incorrect information obviously shot in bad faith at me was warranted. 17:13:03 #monero-geonic-rotten-ofrn-diego-coliseum 17:13:04 jeffro256: I was talking about the way he handled the kewbit matter, which I thought was childish and unprofessional, and got distracted. apologies 17:15:49 🤣🤣🤣 17:16:51 there's nothing I could say about you that would eclipse how big of a douche bag you actually are <=== will you ever stop being such a cunt? 17:17:35 mm? I thought we were done with this for now? 17:17:51 I'm not we. 17:18:24 Guys, please keep it civil and vaguely on topic thank you. 17:18:30 nioCat where's the cat video! 17:18:54 are you able to comment on monero.town through the federation? 17:21:03 we went from "be excellent to each other" to "please keep it civil" haha 17:21:09 how did i end up in 3rd 17:21:58 and i'm pretty sure im banned form that room 17:23:09 Apparently. https://lemmy.cafe/comment/8131464 17:24:25 On subject of licenses, why nobody ever look at the licenses for WIP ccs?? 17:26:30 we went from "be excellent to each other" to "please keep it civil" haha <-- Honestly I'm adjusting my moderation baseline to your attitude (and others) right now, I don't think it's funny. Anyway, can we get back 2014-15 mood and all just like each other again 17:26:35 There are numerous projects w/o proper FOSS licenses, with no license at all, other AGPLv3 projects that haven't _literally_ CHANGED milestones to get paid early AND abandon the project. 17:26:43 @diego you don't think there's a violation of agplv3? 17:27:19 the violation was the release of the binaries. There was no other violation 17:27:35 In contrast, we have many ccs that are in violation of rule 4 17:27:41 In direct* violation 17:28:25 ofrnxmr the release of the binary proofed that the code is in existence. the fact we don't have the code, is the violation of agplv3. 17:28:27 Expecting source before milestone request is unreasonable entitlement 17:28:38 s/proofed/proved 17:28:45 Kemo, yes 17:28:51 binaryFate: agreed and thank you for setting the correct tone for the rest of us 17:29:35 as a greedy community member, i'd like for all code to be made available as soon as possible. 17:29:42 the internal building and testing of the binary is not in violation of anything. The only violation was releasing it to the public 17:30:04 Expecting source before milestone request is unreasonable entitlement <= it's actually some nazi-level BS 17:30:10 and obviously for the appropriate milestone payments to be made 17:30:19 I agree with geonics wording 17:30:24 rottenwheel: Your comment doesn't appear in other instances: https://lemmy.world/post/21111879 17:30:37 release everything you've ever written that is in any way related to Monero or we will not pay you for this milestone 17:30:46 🤷‍♂️ Lemmy moment. 17:31:03 I'll try to report it to cafe's sysadmin. 17:31:12 Geonic, and get this: if you wait til milestone and release all at once, me might just REEEEE 17:31:56 As if its even enforceable to make someone submit WIP code pre-milestone. Its utterly ridiculous 17:32:12 geonic: that is not what was discussed. It wasn't "release everything you've ever written that is in any way related to Monero", but rather "release everything you've ever written that is in any way related to your current CCS proposal". You can still argue that to be unreasonable, but don't strawman, please. 17:32:28 If you want to push a PR to monero-project, you must do 70 commits and tjen squash after youre finished working 17:32:39 And must open all PR's in draft mode!! 17:32:59 this was hyperbole, not strawmanning 17:33:51 Jeffro, the only reasonable request is for code that is related to the milestone, not the entire ccs 17:34:35 right. we agreed to the CCS, with milestones as described, when it was merged. as did the proposer 17:34:46 If i have milestone 4: the gui 17:34:47 why should i have to release the gui while the backend is still a WIPand the gui is just s template mess ? 17:35:11 Meanwhile, jeffro256, look at WIP ccs and their licenses. We have plenty that arent even foss! 17:35:38 "you're hiding unreleased code under the floorboards, aren't you".gif (this is a meme don't kill me) 17:37:03 Foss licenses exist for a reason, and MIT and agpl dont require working in public. MIT doesnt even require releasing in public afaik 17:37:48 I also lean towards this side of the argument, but I want to be accurate about what was discussed 17:37:51 If MIT, theres nothing stoppibg kewbit from creating a sock called "newbit" and releasing "haveno pro" as a proprietary app, claiming that he doesnt know who "newbit" is 17:37:56 ofrnxmr: create enough, the gui was actually the first milestone iirc 17:38:05 s/create/crazy 17:38:13 The milestones arent in order 17:38:15 Please point them out so we can discuss them on Saturday 17:38:45 not a coder, but in my field no one works in public. it's antithetical to creativity. 17:39:48 ofrnxmr agpl requires code be public for public binaries. the binaries are public. therefore code has to be 17:39:50 Eh. It's antithetical to exclusive monetization, not creativity 17:40:03 how do you mean 17:40:06 Lots of public works are creative even when not monetized 17:40:19 Luigi told me to mind my business 17:40:34 for example? like a statue in a public garden or something? 17:40:39 sorry jeffro. 17:42:35 I need to learn to have recency bias and do favors 17:42:54 also need to only apply rules when i feel like it 17:43:13 I need me a spokesperson as well. 17:44:02 geonic: yes, or paintings, or TV broadcasting, or street art, etc, etc 17:44:32 right. none of those are made in public. maybe except graffiti or something 17:44:45 ofnrxmr: you can DM me if you'd prefer I bring them up. I'm fine being the scapegoat 17:44:57 Ill give an example: https://github.com/vtnerd/monero-lws/blob/master/LICENSE 17:44:59 I believe this is intended to be MIT 17:45:08 the sculptor works in the studio, the painter, the TV crew... they release the work when they feel it's ready 17:46:29 or when the deadline comes :) 17:46:30 https://github.com/mollyim/monero-wallet-sdk/blob/main/LICENSE this is supposedly copyleft and not permissive. Code hasnt been updateed in 5 months 17:48:20 That's the same BSD-3 license that Monero Project has 17:48:29 geonic: those are not collaborative arts. sw is. 17:48:55 TV and film are pretty collaborative 17:49:33 and even there no one asks the screenwriter to show what they’ve written that day 17:50:43 but it doesnt say bsd (unless i scanned too quickly) 17:51:24 Yeah this one isn't actually permissive and might be worth bringing up in regards to https://ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/vd-molly-payments-stage1.html 17:52:02 But that CCS doesn't even look active anyways 17:52:34 Jeffro - are we actually against gpl? 17:52:43 It doesn't have to say "BSD" in the license terms for it to be BSD 17:52:50 https://opensource.org/license/BSD-3-clause 17:53:24 Nope I like GPL, but the CCS rules DO state "permissive" licensing 17:53:41 Waller sdk has its own ccs as well 17:53:55 Well then there is a longer list of gpl 17:54:35 copyleft is not permissive? 17:54:57 Mit and bsd etc dont require sharing source 17:55:27 While we are discussing this, IMHO it would be good to get specific commitments about the license of future CCSes that produce non-code products like research papers and audits. Maybe agree to a specific Creative Commons license in the Ideas phase of CCSes. 17:55:55 You can create proprietary derivatives. I think gpl is better for ccs than mit, since mit means that corps can just steal the work 17:56:20 Which is a good reason _not_ to release code until payout 17:56:26 Agreed. We should add a license line to the header of the CCS proposals file so it gets committed to beforehand to avoid all this drama 17:56:47 For example, it would be fantastic to have a permissive CC license that allows us to put the FCMP++ mathematical proofs in the appendix of a larger FCMP paper, with proper authorship attribution. 17:57:02 Agpl was committed to before haveno app was merged 17:57:36 It was not licensed originally 17:57:38 And maybe some guidelines about releasing the LaTeX source of the documents so that tedious parsing of PDFs isn't necessary to extend, repackage, or modify the work. 17:57:44 soloptxmr is agpl 17:59:43 Yes, but maybe a _possible set_ of open source licenses since a project may realize that they really need a GPL library after working on the project for a while. If they commit to MIT, they couldn't use GPL library AFAIK. 18:00:21 I think the other way around. You can add gpl ontop of mit 18:00:44 Mit allows you to even make proprietary derivatives 18:00:58 Gpl does not 18:01:28 I mean if they say in their CCS proposal that they will make the software MIT, then they cannot use a GPL library without making their software GPL 18:02:02 Yes, but I do think that that could have inadvertent effects to its funding, which is fine as long as the proposer recognizes that. A corporate interest might not fund the work if there is a possibility that the licensing switches from MIT to GPL 18:02:11 Oh, right. 18:02:39 which is good for foss lol. 18:02:47 On the other hand, a principled FOSS advocate might only fund a proposal if it uses a copyleft license 18:03:07 Corps shouldnt fund our work so they can take it and make it proprietary 18:04:33 I have the opposite opinion, I think corps funding open source work is a good thing. I think it's a bad thing, but unfortunately much more common, when the open source code ISN'T paid for but used in a proprietary project 18:05:14 bitmain stole xmrig code 18:05:28 If it was MIT, fair game. 18:05:44 Its gpl though - so its a license violation 18:06:34 maybe they hired a consultant who stole it for them? 18:06:41 Well Bitmain has its HQ in Beijing so its sort of fair game regardless ;) 18:06:51 i think corps should give credit where due. Not just use monero to build mobilecoin 18:08:24 Even the linux kernal is gplv2 18:11:29 Mobilecoin gplv3 18:26:34 preland: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1g8pkih/japanese_authorities_arrested_a_gang_of_18/lt06xe6/ 18:31:56 <0​xfffc:monero.social> Nice name. 18:32:13 <0​xfffc:monero.social> IMHO monero should’ve started with GPL. 18:32:41 imho monero have done good using MIT 18:32:52 I like that people can do proprietary branch 18:33:10 ik ik very dictatorship bad thinking tier federal thought 18:34:33 I think when you're an open project you don't mind proprietary versions. Some will argue the opposite and it's entirely ideological. No blame however. 18:41:46 I think ppl will (and do) fix our code and release it on their proprietary forks 18:42:27 building on our hard labor, and not repaying the gesture of sharing code 18:42:41 username checks out 18:49:46 On topic: i dont thing CCS should have to be MIT/bsd etc. If they do, we need to ask for refunds for solopt, wallet sdk and more 18:49:52 (/s) 18:50:21 more seriously you raise an important point for which I don't blame GPL. MIT software are more vulnerable to steal. 18:51:18 Steal WIP code from proposers and use on salvium 18:52:29 https://github.com/salvium/salvium/blob/main/LICENSE lol 18:52:40 At least its still mit? 19:42:56 <3​21bob321:monero.social> MIT requires you to reference original 19:43:31 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Copyleft stops you from making it closed sauce 19:50:53 monerobull: Could you make a new post on monero.town?: 19:50:55 > *On next MRL meeting agenda: Proposal for FCMP++ Hard Fork Activation Rule to Retroactively Ignore Future unlock_time* 19:50:57 > At 17:00 UTC October 23 in the #monero-research-lab:monero.social Matrix channel and #monero-research-lab in Libera IRC. All are welcome. 19:50:59 > https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/1098 20:03:00 Oh nevermind. jeffro posted on monero.town about it 20:03:15 hello, thakns jeffro 20:03:18 hello, thanks jeffro 20:06:42 hi 20:09:36 a lot of messages 20:09:37 but i cant understand something 20:09:39 whats the problem here? is it because kewbit didnt release the source code? 20:09:41 is that a big deal? he didnt get paid "yet" for his first milestone right? and he should release it if he wants to get paid 20:09:51 why are we fighting then? 20:14:44 I would consider all of this first: 20:14:45 I think we should put this risk of proprietary idea derivatives to bed and stop making it so clear it’s a fear, though you’ve made it clear now this is your biggest “fear” essentially, sadly a well written chat GPT type mechanism could probably handle a complete evading the copyright anyway and anyone could do this. Unless you own a PATENT which is the strongest form of pr 20:14:47 otection, a trademark can help too in certain cases, but unless you own a charity like a US 5013(c) with a board it must include at least 5 people, I don’t think any one individual is entitled to register that half of Monero or its community. 20:14:49 The next point on this is simply quite bluntly a “catch me if you can” type response. You think you’re just going to reveal the identity of the person infringing? You maybe be able to in some cases but some people know too much good luck reasoning with a god-like security research for example. 20:14:51 Additionally, you’d just be further limiting the scope of talent at your disposal for work. It’s one thing trusting people who do not reveal their identities for potentially very large transactions, it’s another thing to refuse to split it up into milestones. I think Luigi said something to Deigo “we’re a 2 billion market cap coin we can do what we want blah blah”. How 20:14:53 about “no you cant” if you want try to convince what some people might refer to as “idiots” to have their entire project paid at the end (I guess you want them to release the source code before hand too lol) then you need to completely remove the Jekyll front you a requiring that people put to define milestones, this is misleading (this is for sure a move backwards, I wou 20:14:55 ldn’t engage in any further work under term like this, others might in lower value sub 50xmr situations.) 20:14:57 Another point to raise is double standards, basicswap (for example being a high value milestone) is meeting milestones and getting paid, are you ready to justify that to each person if they inquire about it that are rejected, especially after submitting work having it told them. You need to focus on keeping PR good too, I might only take 1 well written post at the top of Google so 20:14:59 soil the current administrations PR. 20:15:01 TLDR; don’t add restrictions like this and make sure it’s DAMN clear if you choose to do it anyway. 20:17:43 I would consider all of this first: 20:17:45 I think we should put this risk of proprietary idea derivatives to bed and stop making it so clear it’s a fear, though you’ve made it clear now this is your biggest “fear” essentially, sadly a well written chat GPT type mechanism could probably handle a complete evading the copyright anyway and anyone could do this. Unless you own a PATENT which is the strongest form of pr 20:17:47 otection, a trademark can help too in certain cases, but unless you own a charity like a US 5013(c) with a board it must include at least 5 people, I don’t think any one individual is entitled to register that half of Monero or its community. 20:17:49 The next point on this is simply quite bluntly a “catch me if you can” type response. You think you’re just going to reveal the identity of the person infringing? You maybe be able to in some cases but some people know too much good luck reasoning with a god-like security research for example. 20:17:51 Additionally, you’d just be further limiting the scope of talent at your disposal for work. It’s one thing trusting people who do not reveal their identities for potentially very large transactions, it’s another thing to refuse to split it up into milestones. I think Luigi said something to Deigo “we’re a 2 billion market cap coin we can do what we want blah blah”. How 20:17:53 about “no you cant” if you want try to convince what some people might refer to as “idiots” to have their entire project paid at the end (I guess you want them to release the source code before hand too lol) then you need to completely remove the Jekyll front you a requiring that people put to define milestones, this is misleading (this is for sure a move backwards, I wou 20:17:55 ldn’t engage in any further work under term like this, others might in lower value sub 50xmr situations.) 20:17:57 Another point to raise is double standards, basicswap (for example being a high value milestone) is meeting milestones and getting paid, are you ready to justify that to each person if they inquire about it that are rejected, especially after submitting work having not told them. You need to focus on keeping PR good too, I might only take 1 well written post at the top of Google s 20:17:59 o soil the current administrations PR. 20:18:01 TLDR; don’t add restrictions like this and make sure it’s DAMN clear if you choose to do it anyway. 20:19:18 One of the messages related to this 20:22:49 Your project is agplv3 so the mit talk doesnt apply 20:22:57 Okay and to cover this as a realist: 20:22:59 They choose to lie, in their interests, what do you do then? You’ve already found your self someone who is willing to engage in deception for profit, what you rather, they said they has code or didn’t? And who would you rather work with, deceptive or non-deceptive people? 20:24:24 id rather they show the work that they are requesting pay for 20:24:57 Talking about code that isn't public is simply marketing 20:25:30 Don’t make rules, what you cannot enforce without dependency on the proposing parties honesty. It’s really non-seance to do this. 20:26:18 You cant enforce a rule of "show source" 20:26:24 Its literally nonsense 20:26:36 And whoever proposed it probably just had the communities interests at heart but it need to be removed, because it’s an abused blanket rule too 20:26:57 Imagine this: kewbit HAS no source for 3 weeks. then he works all night and delivers the whole thing overnight 20:27:18 Do we railroad him for 3 week about WHERE IS THE COOOOODDDEEE? No. 20:27:26 Don’t worry about me for now, I’m a lost customer 20:27:44 As far as I’m concerned I’m just helping professional feedback 20:27:59 I'm using you as an example 20:28:19 but can use any other project. 20:28:22 You lost me as a contributor so far from most of this non-sense things. 20:28:57 idk why you listen to ppl 20:29:19 your ccs was merged with agpl. Anyone complaining now can shutup 20:29:21 You've said this at least 10 times in the last 24 hours yet the vast bulk of activity in this channel is all you whining about the same thing over and over again, to different people, sometimes just different wording. 20:29:30 Can you please move on? 20:29:34 Yeah you can but it seems like no you’ve just not regarded what I said about reality cases. 20:29:42 Your milestone was written specifically. Anyone complaining about it can shutup 20:29:51 This isn't Monero Community Whining Kewbit Safe Place. 20:30:24 next time Diego slides into your dm’s talking about licenses, just send him this https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/583 20:30:34 end of conversation 20:30:48 there is no rule that can prevent your payout 20:31:11 And diego's desogns for -site arent released under a permissive license either afaict 20:31:52 As of right now as far as I am concerned at least, there is no further release happening. There is a proposed discussion with Luigi. Depending on that goes, is the final factor. 20:31:53 But im trying to keep the topic on resolving potential issues with the rules themselves and the ones being proposed to help try to make the system better, not worse. 20:32:07 Nobody cares what luigi, diego or anyone else says. You have a contract with your ccs terms. Youre not employed by core 20:32:21 I mentioned in DM it went well. 20:32:45 He holds the wallet, this is why I mean about the realist side of things. 20:32:59 in this situation he gets paid for his first milestone regardless of future ones 20:33:01 well, normally 20:33:12 He was supposed to step down from the wallet in march 20:33:19 He also lost 400k and didnt tell anyone 20:33:31 he didn’t lose it 20:33:40 Well that is promising then hopefully we switch things back ground again 20:33:56 Was hAcKeD 20:34:04 It's looking like it yeah 20:34:26 your imagination 20:34:34 well fk yall im tired of reading all that 20:34:46 Not my imagination. It was a tentative date 20:34:56 <3​21bob321:monero.social> But he is fingering the pulse. Its his job to be everywhere. 20:34:57 have a good night real_glitch 20:35:12 let me see if leo can summarize it 20:35:21 nop 20:35:39 Luigi maintaining the new wallet was a temporary measure to get ccs back up and running 20:35:42 No way leo can summarize the edits from IRC side. They are a melt 20:36:14 your imagination. bro is going to hold that wallet and merge access to its death and no idealist will be able to do anything about it 20:36:50 As a realist I have to advocate that it’s more respectable to have said that with reason, than to have lied. The purpose of saying it in my context, was to move things along from an administration point of view, as I thought it would bring excitement. Obviously knowing now the biggest fear in CCS is how the copyrighted chooses to licence it, I do understand why that seemed concerning. 20:38:15 I don’t think I selected the right comment there but it was regarding telling people that you have source code that is not released. 20:38:20 jic, i'm all for luigi to keep the wallet 20:38:45 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Multi sig 20:38:46 kewbit: you’re not going to change the system. you will need to release the code for whatever milestone you’re claiming. just do the work, don’t engage with grandstanders, and you’ll be fine 20:39:06 or not 20:39:15 +1 geonic 20:39:27 <3​21bob321:monero.social> This is like new website, goesnin circles 20:39:30 grandstanders = everyone that isnt your milestone 20:39:35 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Goes in* 20:39:54 You dont have an employer 20:39:59 I’m not going to go over things again that I went through last night 20:40:23 kewbit for the love of god stop wasting your time go touch grass and continue coding like the god you are 20:40:39 You dont need to! Request you ms, sit back and wait 20:40:49 these people don't give a damn nail about your opinion 20:40:51 <3​21bob321:monero.social> I blame social media for allowing people to think they can constantly whinge the same thing over and over 20:40:53 Right I’m off again if this nonsense is starting 20:40:56 Anybody telling you to dance for dollars must have imagined your "stripper" milstone 20:41:24 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Say your piece and be done with it 20:41:32 Sorry what non sense is this now? 20:41:41 lmao principledFossAdvocate is literally thumbsing up its opponents 20:41:55 What do you think I’ve been doing? 😂 20:42:09 Youre being asked to dance for $. I dont recall you having a milestone for that 20:42:29 <3​21bob321:monero.social> But you said it so many times its almost a meme 20:42:40 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Like “finger on the pulse” 20:43:01 I wish I had the feminine characteristics that would get me free money like that. 20:43:16 Sadly I do not 20:43:28 strippers work hard for their money 20:43:33 I've so many drama and jokes coming to my mind right now I swear I could do a binary tree 20:43:38 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Shaking there ass 20:43:45 So stop playing ball 20:43:53 Oh sorry I’m not tidally up to date with memes anymore, I used to be 20:43:55 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Its a job thats need for leverage 20:44:10 You submit your milestone AS WRITTEN. Everything and everyone else and get fkd 20:44:37 60 percent of the whole conversation is rottenwheel throwing random bullshits on kewbit and he is fighting back lol 20:44:37 i wish element had a mute or hide function for a specified user 20:44:39 it could be awesome if you could control the range like, shut rotten for today or yesterday 20:44:53 60 percent of the whole conversation is rottenwheel throwing random bullshits on kewbit and he is fighting back lol 20:44:55 i wish element had a mute or hide function for a specific user 20:44:57 it could be awesome if you could control the range like, shut rotten for today or yesterday 20:44:59 <3​21bob321:monero.social> You can ignore people 20:45:01 I’m not sure what value you’re adding here, I’m not asking for anyone’s explaining on the offer I rejected from the core team. 20:45:03 for real you can mute specific people 20:45:08 look at me I muted myself 20:45:30 Matrix does have a mute button (ignore user) 20:45:37 <3​21bob321:monero.social> I hear an echo again 20:45:45 I’ve said the deal is off, that doesn’t mean I’m not happy to give feedback on the process. 20:45:49 I hear an echo again 20:45:53 I wouldn't even listen to the offer. Terms are written in the ccs. There is no further offer 20:46:00 But you’re also just echoing crap 😂 20:46:19 <3​21bob321:monero.social> New ben 10 character 20:46:23 Exactly 20:46:43 Not being done with it for the past 24 hrs. and still here? 🤔 20:46:45 Problem solved, which is my point from last night. 20:46:59 <3​21bob321:monero.social> I like how random people join and then they agree with people 20:47:03 This was basically all resolved last night. Nothing new is being discussed here today. 20:47:06 There is a reason I’m still here and that’s non of your concern 20:47:32 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Mods can mute aswell :) 20:47:36 I brought my proposed solution from last night to luigi and plowsof and it was well-received. 20:47:58 the solution to the problem you created lol 20:48:10 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Community know about this side deal? 20:48:12 It looks like the current milestone/proposal will go through on the current basis, and there will be a suggested word change that can be discussed at some community meetings about the merits of adding it 20:48:15 Rotten again, your feed back tends to be quite useless this is an ongoing concern 😂 20:48:27 I don't know how many times I have to tell you geonic, I was asked to look into this matter by the CCS maintainers 20:48:37 <3​21bob321:monero.social> This is gas lighting now 20:48:49 go yell at them please about the problem THEY created (if you're so adamant that its fraudulent) 20:49:04 I actually encourage that too 20:49:06 Proceed with the original terms of the contract? Sounds like an obvious solution 20:49:22 they chose the licensing expert to intervene! geniuses all around :) 20:49:24 all this to be said, as far as kewbit's proposal is concerned, it's been sorted. 20:49:36 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Both sides have said there piece and we will wait on the monero court to give there judgement 20:49:49 Deviate from original terms? Sounds like a joke 20:49:59 glad to hear you come to your senses and acknowledge the truth of the matter 20:50:03 no such court, terms are in the ccs as already stated 20:50:11 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Its pretty clear 20:50:32 <3​21bob321:monero.social> All work is permissive even when wip 20:50:33 anyone wanna play chess https://lichess.org/sNnfoc8n ? (This is a malware link obviously) 20:50:48 I want malware 20:50:51 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Hmm random link 20:50:58 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Ima click it 20:51:08 yuck it’s an actual chess link 20:51:13 (: 20:51:22 If you have 6 hours of free time, go ahead and read the last 18 hours of messages in full. If you really want to be on the same page for those who are no on the same page. 20:51:33 Permissive doesnt mean public 20:51:46 Oh we’re not around 20:51:50 Or we’re not around 20:51:54 who is on my game? 20:52:40 I’m watching but not playing. This better be good 20:52:56 New rule: you can't use a local git repo!!!! /s 20:52:59 Dan (Is not the man & Braxman Tomsparks Advocate) Backup: are you a fucking ot? 20:53:20 Must commit directly to github!! NO FORCE PUSHES ALLOWED 20:53:40 MUST KEEP HISTORY OF ALL WORKING BRANCHES 20:54:05 must install a keylogger! 20:54:30 And a screen recorder! 20:54:45 And a webcam!!! 20:55:00 kewbit: if you haven't sent a message to plowsof or luigi with payout instructions, please do so soon. 20:55:28 and if you have, I suspect payout won't take much longer. 20:55:30 it should be on the comment on gitlab 20:55:35 I have already provided that on the thread with my signed information 20:55:52 perfect. Then the payout won't be much longer. 20:55:53 I can link 20:56:05 Great 20:56:13 \o/ 20:56:40 I have never put anyone on ignore but I have scrolled past people 20:57:08 I look forward to publishing some legal UI based binaries now 20:57:18 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Install activex please 20:57:27 Finally do some proper testing 20:57:44 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Me???? 21:00:32 * midipoet waits for the fireworks when kewbit pushes the latest updates, and it turns out there is an issue with the licence 21:00:55 idk who I just played with but it was cool thx 21:01:04 That was quick 21:04:48 the license of the app kewbit is developing (https://github.com/KewbitXMR/haveno-app) was inherited from the CCS funded Haveno https://github.com/haveno-dex/haveno 21:05:39 Haveno wasnt ccs funded 21:05:51 Poor kayabanerve has been writing for more than 10 minutes... 21:06:15 Haveno ui was, and is apache 2.0 https://github.com/haveno-dex/haveno-ui/blob/master/LICENSE 21:07:11 true. Haveno existing along side the CCS funded UI from the beginning as AGPL was never an issue 21:07:24 It was it was just really long time ago no one picked it up recently so it was recommissioned 21:07:59 https://ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/haveno-frontend.html 21:08:00 i repeat: Haveno was NOT ccs funded 21:08:29 I was only making a joke about the licence. 21:08:38 Soloptxmr is AGPLv3 and solopt even CHANGED their milestones 21:08:39 But good fingering, people 21:09:59 Woodser did bring up the use of Apache 2 for the app code, but I said I think there is no choice on it being AGPLv3 so that’s what it’s currently set to in the official Haveno-dex github 21:10:20 Haveno was a financial investment, shopped and eventually sold to VC investors. To quit erc "You funded the UI, not the backend" 21:10:45 s/quit/quote 21:10:48 Please let us know now, if that’s not the case because I’m pushing code with that ever licence it set to maybe as soon as tonight once I get enough first milestone confirmations 21:11:09 Please let us know now, if that’s not the case because I’m pushing code with that licence it set to maybe as soon as tonight once I get enough first milestone confirmations 21:11:24 <3​21bob321:monero.social> One key at a time 21:11:55 i think you might need to use agplv3 if you use any of the dex code 21:12:15 Woodser is doesn’t take money for the backend 21:12:33 Woodser doesn’t take money for the backend 21:12:39 Lol 21:12:46 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Only went to mainnet now 21:13:06 woodser is a legend 21:13:09 That’s not my business do discuss though 21:13:17 Yes, all of those donations never happened /s 21:13:21 He is a noble for sure 21:13:26 Erciccione was the only one ever paid /s 21:13:29 I respect him a lot 21:13:31 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Plowsof we have a licence lawyer here somewhere docs used 21:13:45 took an abandoned ship and made it seaworthy 21:13:46 <3​21bob321:monero.social> {{}} 21:14:09 it was always his ship 21:14:23 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Erc20’s arc 21:14:33 was erc just grandstanding the whole time 21:14:41 Erciccione was just the frontman, raising $ for it 21:14:45 there was a boating accident? 21:15:17 ah, the ofrn to haveno’s basicswap :p 21:15:37 Erc had a 50% stake in haveno iirc. 21:15:45 Vik bought him out 21:16:03 don’t we all wish Vik could buy us out 21:16:15 all that time and effort… 21:16:18 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Geonic ^ 21:16:19 <3​21bob321:monero.social> https://matrix.monero.social/_matrix/media/v1/download/monero.social/qfUqXqTlBxJJDbLGhHoPfAAb 21:16:39 haha nice movie set 21:17:07 erc "frontend in 4-6 months" >> 2 yrs later, backend still unfinished 21:18:08 needed a bigger volatility buffer I guess 21:18:23 1000%? 21:18:43 not enough 21:19:30 100000% 21:20:02 Too many 0s. Mayne 123456% 21:20:29 yeah gotta make it look like there’s logic behind it 21:21:23 were hiring 3-5 unnamed frontend devs from a 10 star operation 21:21:33 Their price is 15k/mth 21:22:03 Ignore that tho. I promise, we'll pay monero developers by running a competitor to ccs called the "engine" 21:22:19 Are we talking about haveno or basicswap? 21:22:40 It's really not clear 21:22:45 haveno 21:23:10 Thanks for clearing that up 21:23:11 Basicswap has no buffer, or unnamed devs, or some random company doing the work 21:23:19 It was a joke 21:23:21 A joke 21:23:29 And not 15k/mth/dev 21:23:45 was the random company ErC LLC? 21:24:45 `Viabl` 21:24:59 "After a scrupulous research, we decided to work with Viabl, a skilled team with decades of frontend development in their portfolio." 21:25:21 I wish CCSs that pay third parties would submit invoices like I did 21:25:25 Theyve been doing frontend dev since windows 95 guys 21:27:04 "For this rate we will get 2 experienced frontend developers and a lead dev dedicated to Haveno." original changed to (new ccs) "This is the estimated cost to complete the frontend. We are already in contact with a team of three devs, which will start working on Haveno as soon as this CCS is accepted." 21:30:12 if i could summarise my end: there was a potential rule break (which had some feedback in #haveno, outside of monerologs' reach, one problem). the path forward of ' payout request is unrelated to the potential rule break , payout request is open source ' needed a second opinion and clarification. i couldn't hand on heart tell luigi, these are the facts, this is the decision the co 21:30:13 mmunity is happy with. the path forward could not be delayed, for the sake of kewbit and his ongoing project. Diego has successfully fingered the pulse quickly and remained pretty much intact. now, i hope we can go back to ignoring 3+ year old ccs' and be happy again 21:32:27 Diego Salazar: The CCS doesn't allow copyleft licenses? Hm. I'd argue it should if declared and justified ahead of time. There was even discussion on if RandomX should've been GPL so bitmain would've had to yield their RISC-V JIT impl to the community. I support the proposed solution to add a license field to each CCS and handle it case-by-case, solely requiring FOSS. 21:32:29 Also, NACK to requiring regular uploads. Work must be uploaded before claiming, obviously, and most always be uploaded permissively if uploaded, but we shouldn't require regular git syncing IMO. 21:32:31 Also, Siren, AFAIK, code linking GPLv3 can be MIT itself in its unlinked form. It's the joint product which must be distributed under the more restrictive GPLv3. 21:32:33 SyntheticBird: Monero is BSD, not MIT. 21:32:35 I think that’s the jist of it 21:32:48 I was writing my reply as I read today's log. Apologies it sent without the line spacing I intended. 21:33:48 Tor do this thing where you add —enable-gpl flag to for anyone to build it with PoW 21:34:46 tor ships with gpl bin's (pow enabled by default) on non-proprietary OS 21:34:50 Otherwise it’s not included, we might have to focus on giving people solid build from source instructions if licences conflicts are too cumbersome to resolve 21:35:48 it is included on just about every modern linux distro 21:36:02 Tested fedora, ubuntu, alpine etc etc 21:36:05 Ahh, I only noticed this when self building, can we distribute on GPL or no? 21:36:11 Arch 21:36:21 Yes I noticed PoW is in fact available there too 21:36:25 Can't ship on mac or windows 21:37:03 i think gplv2 is compatible with agpl.. but dont quote me 21:37:38 For my own clarity are there any considerations that needs to be made if I include forks of packages I’m using for the app, there are a lot of MIT, BSD and AGPL mostly they are MIT I think 21:37:45 tesla can disable fast charging remotely, they need to open source their software so people can disable that before their next CCS IMO 21:38:07 Its equi-x is gpl3 21:39:10 You can add mit to whatever you want, even proprietary works. IANAL 21:39:27 That’s not ideal we need to ship it everywhere, if you’re on Mac or Linux the installer won’t just download binaries it will actually check if it can build from source first based on the arch, does that solve the issue ? 21:40:20 It doesn’t do that recursively yet but I will need to do that for fdroid anyway 21:40:58 I think the user would have to opt in, or youd have to separate it from the app 21:41:23 for windows/mac 21:41:27 Can I present the licence in the installer for them to accept 21:41:45 Or is it something WE need to comply to that doesn’t involve the user? 21:41:50 gpl3 is a lot more extreme than gpl2 21:42:49 i dont think so, otherwise tor would ship it 21:44:23 From a technical standpoint we can: 21:44:25 - present licence to user for acceptance and have them build from source 21:44:27 - present licence and download binaries (preferred for less maintenance it’s what have I Java edition does with monero-wallet-RPC) for example 21:44:31 Its possible though that if its being built from source on the host pc, that its ok 21:45:08 But should look into what exactly the restrictions are before moving forward with it 21:45:24 One day I'll build my own CCS platform and yall be jealous 21:45:41 If unsure, ship w/o pow u til sure 21:45:45 Yes that can be arranged but that wasn’t what I had planned for desktop or iPhone 21:45:47 Until* sure 21:47:08 I used it as an example to drive ideas but there is no need for PoW between the app and the daemon, there isn’t really even a need for Tor so I2P was considered for a bit. 21:47:52 You’d be foolish to expose your app link code so it would never be public facing therefore not needed in the build 21:50:35 FWIW, Serai services are AGPL and Serai libs are MIT. That makes its libs public good, it able to be integrated into non-GPL work, yet forks compelled into transparency. 23:11:36 https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLStaticVsDynamic 23:11:37 Linking is irrelevant and there are no exceptions for dynamic linking in the case of GPL. So no, those cannot be MIT. 23:11:39 https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic 23:11:41 However, LGPL makes the exception that you have described. 23:26:22 Diego Salazar: the link that you posted about FOSS licensing is SEO slop written by AI that is straight up misinformation. 23:30:01 Ah sorry. I indeed searched "difference between copyleft and permissive" and grabbed one of the top results. I was a fool. 23:30:35 Yeah the state of the internet and search engines... 23:44:32 geonic: it's not about the kind of campaign. It's about the creative work produced. You produced non-free/non-open media which conflicts with the same CCS policy. It would have been appropriate if the movie was released under a CC license. You can find the definition of "open" here: 23:44:33 https://opendefinition.org/od/2.1/en/