11:39:58 <one-horse-wagon[> I have posted a plan on the implementation of Seraphis and Jamtis at-- https://github.com/seraphis-migration/wallet3/issues --  and also at paste.debian.net/1259239 
11:41:35 <one-horse-wagon[> The GitHub one is easier on the eyes to read.
11:42:16 <one-horse-wagon[> See you all at today's meeting.
12:24:28 * one-horse-wagon[ posted a file: (49KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/download/monero.social/rdnjAEJvNkRnbTWdCWEltlTB/SeraphisPlan.odt >
12:24:34 <one-horse-wagon[>  * Here is an attachment which is probably the easiest to read.  To allay any fears, please scan for viruses before you open it.
15:58:18 <UkoeHB> Meeting 1hr
17:00:14 <UkoeHB> meeting time https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/748
17:00:14 <UkoeHB> 1. greetings
17:00:14 <UkoeHB> hello
17:00:31 <one-horse-wagon[> Hello
17:00:32 <dangerousfreedom> Hello
17:00:36 <font-deny[m]> hello
17:01:25 <Rucknium[m]> Hi
17:02:55 <jberman[m]> hello
17:03:26 <rbrunner> Hi
17:04:42 <UkoeHB> 2. updates, what has everyone been working on?
17:05:46 <jberman[m]> me: submitted the final update on my CCS, background sync/scan_tx PR's are ready for review, nearing completion on stress testing the pool, planning to jump into input selection in Seraphis as my first task there
17:05:56 <UkoeHB> me: working on update seraphis multisig to allow legacy inputs, should have this done within a few days (tm); after that is adding a seraphis coinbase tx type and updating unit tests to use that
17:06:04 <UkoeHB> on updating*
17:06:50 <Rucknium[m]> me: working on other projects while waiting for initial OSPEAD review.
17:06:55 <one-horse-wagon[> I  wrote up a plan for the implementation of Seraphiis and Jamtis and posted it here.  Hopefully, everyone got a chance to look at it.
17:07:16 <UkoeHB> this is the plan from one-horse-wagon[  https://github.com/seraphis-migration/wallet3/issues/28
17:07:43 <dangerousfreedom> me: organizing the wallet tiers and the work that should be done to initiate a wallet in legacy and jamtis standards.
17:08:22 <rbrunner> Looks like that plan, same content as the .odt file
17:08:44 <rbrunner> Good to have it as an issue, for discussing it
17:10:21 <UkoeHB> 3. discussion, there are two topics on deck for today: one-horse-wagon['s plan and jamtis checksums https://gist.github.com/tevador/50160d160d24cfc6c52ae02eb3d17024#64-checksum
17:11:57 <rbrunner> I was late to return home and saw the proposal only a few minutes ago, unfortunately
17:13:37 <rbrunner> But other may already have formed some opinion?
17:13:54 <dangerousfreedom> I like the proposal of one-horse-wagon . In my opinion we are already doing it but if I understood you want the wallet development to be something more official/structured ? 
17:15:52 <UkoeHB> Regarding the plan, I'd say the administrator stuff is maybe a bit aggressive. rbrunner is already doing a good job as coordinator. We don't actually know the exact steps that need to be done or what the best order is (this is a matter of ongoing discussion). I think getting a test network up sooner rather than later is a good idea, although I have no idea what's required to get that far (maybe quite a number of 
17:15:52 <UkoeHB> intermediate steps remain).
17:17:34 <rbrunner> I confess that so far I was running under assumption "As long as nobody complains (e.g. from the Core Team) it's probably ok". But have not problem to contact them, to inform and listen what they think
17:18:33 <rbrunner> In one point I agree wholeheartedly with one-horse-wagon: The more people fully commit to this gigantic project, the better
17:18:52 <one-horse-wagon[> The biggest problem I see is the core developers are not onboard yet.  Direction has to come from the very top and right now there is none.
17:19:22 <rbrunner> Well, we don't now, I would say, we just don't have word yet.
17:19:48 <plowsof> i'll prod them 
17:20:05 <rbrunner> Gently, I hope?
17:20:08 <UkoeHB> I can already see the answer: keep at it. lol
17:20:25 <rbrunner> Yeah, but why not. We do hear damned rarely from them.
17:20:36 <plowsof> lol
17:20:36 <dangerousfreedom> I guess so :p
17:21:44 <UkoeHB> plowsof: do you have an update about BP++?
17:21:50 <Rucknium[m]> I think the Core Team takes the advice: "That Core Team is best which governs least."
17:22:25 <plowsof> quarkslab - unavailable until Q2 2023 (said they will come back with quotes and or follow up questions) Kudelski security / CypherStack, i await their reply (after their initial response)
17:22:37 <rbrunner> Things like that might become important, if people start to feel we just decide over their heads, or even ignore them on purpose, there might be opposition as a result
17:22:47 <UkoeHB> plowsof: thanks :)
17:22:52 <rbrunner> and that tends to be a productivity and motivation killer
17:23:20 <Rucknium[m]> IMHO, I don't think direction needs to come from "the top". According to getmonero.org, "mediation" is a major role of Core. There haven't been major disagreements yet, so Core has not been involved.
17:24:48 <one-horse-wagon[> Rucknium:Seraphis and Jamtis are a major step for Monero and to hear nothing from the top makes little sense.
17:25:42 <jberman[m]> who exactly are you waiting to hear from?
17:26:01 <rbrunner> Hmmm, maybe "the top" is not the top in this matter. Development of Monero is a bit chaotic, if somebody comes forward and implements something, it happens :)
17:26:10 <UkoeHB> they have generally been quiet about research projects iirc, since they mainly do custodial things like manage the community resources
17:26:40 <rbrunner> I mean, who ordered that UkoeHB guy to disturb our quit Monero life with something so big? :)
17:26:45 <rbrunner> *quite
17:27:08 <rbrunner> We could do CLSAG in peace until we are all old
17:27:18 <UkoeHB> lol
17:27:51 <rbrunner> No, after this discussion now, I would like to get at least "comment" from them
17:28:30 <rbrunner> I know that binaryfate will be affected, because "his" Rino wallet will be affected heavily, as a JavaScript / WASM wallet.
17:28:56 <Rucknium[m]> A comment from them would be good, yes.
17:28:57 <rbrunner> Probably much more difficult to adjust than even the wallet2 based apps.
17:30:28 <one-horse-wagon[> We need more than a comment.  We need for them to get behind the project and pick an administrator and the program seriously underway.  
17:31:06 <one-horse-wagon[> * administrator and get the program
17:32:05 <rbrunner> Is there any important difference if people just accept me as administrator by merit, versus the Core Team formally appoints me? Serious question, hopefully not coming over as aggressive.
17:32:33 <rbrunner> Or just because nobody else steps up ...
17:33:22 <plowsof> yes people accept you as admin by merit 
17:33:47 <one-horse-wagon[> IMO, you are the perfect guy to run the show.  But you have no power to do anything.  
17:33:49 <rbrunner> Hmm, yes, but maybe appointing me formally would have solid advantages?
17:33:58 <dangerousfreedom> I would say that it is even better by merit than if the core team appoints someone that we dont know.
17:34:22 <rbrunner> Well, I have the power to program and make PRs. I can't merge them, that's true.
17:34:43 <rbrunner> So of course luigi could stop me dead in my tracks.
17:35:07 <rbrunner> But to say "I have no power to do anything" sounds a bit strange to me, frankly.
17:35:10 <one-horse-wagon[> dangerousfreedom: That wouldn't be wise because the job requires a good deal of technical sophistication which rbrunnern7 has.
17:35:39 <luigi1111w> core is not going to appoint an administrator or arbitrate unless there is fighting/significant issue going on. It seems like the participants are getting along swimmingly so far with rbrunner doing his thing
17:35:44 <dangerousfreedom> one-horse-wagon[: Thats what I'm saying
17:36:44 <rbrunner> Thanks, luigi, I try hard to to "my thing" well. No guarantees, however :)
17:36:57 <one-horse-wagon[> luigi1111w: Why is appointing an administrator a problem?
17:37:20 <rbrunner> I mean, in a project of this size, there will be conflicts sooner or later, or at least serious disagreements
17:37:50 <luigi1111w> because core strives to be irrelevant.
17:37:50 <rbrunner> Even with the best of intentions from all involved parties
17:39:18 <one-horse-wagon[> luigi1111w: Yea but you guys aren't.  You will decide in the end as to what gets incorporated.
17:39:44 <luigi1111w> only to the extent there isn't consensus
17:39:45 <plowsof> we the people assign rbrunner as administrator +1
17:40:15 <luigi1111w> anyway I don't want to make unilateral statements for core. If input is required we can discuss it
17:40:50 <rbrunner> How do you personally look at Seraphis?
17:41:08 <rbrunner> If you are here, a small comment ... :)
17:41:26 <rbrunner> And Jamtis of course
17:42:49 <rbrunner> Maybe already returned back to the Olymp.
17:42:51 <luigi1111w> it's a big change that I don't fully understand / the full implications
17:44:26 <rbrunner> Well, yes, I think nobody has yet full understanding and overview concerning implications.
17:46:38 <luigi1111w> so then I have trepidation :)
17:46:53 <rbrunner> In any case, it would be good for the project to be at least sure that Core has no problem with me.
17:47:48 <rbrunner> You may give the others a quick call by using whatever you have there for Core, a red telephone maybe?
17:48:01 <rbrunner> To make sure you are in consensus
17:50:00 <hyc> dev consensus is really what matters, and it appears that is already a given
17:50:16 <SerHack> hi
17:50:19 <hyc> having an "administrator" isn't a bad idea, but that can still be community-chosen
17:50:41 <hyc> just like during RandomX development, I took over the administrivia, interfacing with the auditor teams, etc
17:51:29 <rbrunner> Sounds like it, yeah. I am also quite time-limited to do much more, e.g. code, to be honest. But I was frank about that.
17:51:34 <hyc> a clear delegation of responsibilities is a good thing.
17:51:59 <hyc> and core doesn't need to get involved unless the devs have unresolvable conflict
17:53:24 <rbrunner> But is *is* a quite special way to drive a venture the size and importance of Monero further. It worked so far, however.
17:54:14 <hyc> this is an open source project, developers drive it. that's how open source works.
17:54:17 <rbrunner> Better than most other coins, I would even say.
17:55:25 <dangerousfreedom> I dont know if we have any more time but I would like to discuss the new checksum algorithm for Jamtis. Currently we use Keccak but since it was replaced by blake2 in Seraphis I was thinking about using blake2 also. What are the ideas here? I would be fine using blake3 also but I dont think we need to innovate that much.
17:55:31 <one-horse-wagon[> Can we reach consensus here.  Put rbrunner up as the official administrator?
17:56:05 <plowsof> +1
17:56:13 <hyc> no objection here
17:56:26 <one-horse-wagon[> +1
17:56:27 <jberman[m]> sgtm
17:56:30 <hyc> as for keccak vs blake2 - what was the reason for changing it in Seraphis?
17:56:30 <UkoeHB> dangerousfreedom: I think we should table that until next week. It should be easy enough to switch out the algorithm as needed.
17:57:00 <Rucknium[m]> IMHO, people who are writing the code are best to ask about an administrator. But if I would vote, I vote yes.
17:57:00 <hyc> indeed, choice of hash algo is pretty unconstrained
17:57:18 <UkoeHB> hyc: blake2b is faster and has a keyed hash mode. Also, some of the hash behavior is changing (mainly hash to scalar is now hash to 64 bytes before scalar reducing instead of hash to 32 bytes).
17:57:42 <UkoeHB> rbrunner: keep at it :p
17:58:04 <hyc> UkoeHB: makes sense. speed is also why we use blake2b instad of keccak in randomx
17:58:18 <rbrunner> Looks like it.
17:58:58 <hyc> keyed hash seems less critical, you can use HMAC on anything if you really want that
17:59:08 <binaryFate> rbrunner: what does "administrator" mean here?
17:59:47 <rbrunner> What I basically am already doing: Managing the project "implement a Seraphis / Jamtis core wallet in the Monero codebase"
18:00:09 <rbrunner> Setting up project infrastructure, for example. Writing issues.
18:00:27 <rbrunner> Arrange meetings, or at least take part of any, to be informed.
18:00:41 <binaryFate> sounds good to me
18:01:00 <UkoeHB> hyc: yeah but at least it's a case of 'one less thing to get right' by using the blake2b interface
18:01:08 <rbrunner> Later review code, or help to review, merge to some repository
18:01:24 <rbrunner> a project reposistory
18:01:46 <hyc> UkoeHB: sure. anyway, blake2b is a good choice for any number of reasons
18:03:04 <UkoeHB> Ok we are at the end of the hour and seemed to have wrapped up discussion, so I'll call it here. Thanks for attending everyone.
18:03:11 <one-horse-wagon[> Very good.  Some of the important parts of my suggested plan are accepted.  Congratulations to you rbrunner.
18:03:18 <rbrunner> Thanks!
18:04:01 <rbrunner> No, really, appreciate it, and good we had already 2 Core members drive by, have a look, and finding nothing to object. That's something.
18:04:39 <dangerousfreedom> Thank you everyone.
18:06:41 <binaryFate> <rbrunner> I know that binaryfate will be affected, because "his" Rino wallet will be affected heavily, as a JavaScript / WASM wallet.  <--- fwiw whatever "professional" investments or involvements I have is not relevant to my opinion about Monero's directions
18:10:07 <rbrunner> Good to know. And I do think it will take a long time until we see clearly how a Seraphis + Jamtis web wallet should best be implemented.
21:20:58 <ArticMine> Sorry I missed the meeting today. I have been swamped. 
21:21:55 <ArticMine>  Put rbrunner up as the official administrator <--- strongly in favor
21:22:43 <ArticMine> This is be very helpful with the Seraphis implementation 
21:49:14 <ArticMine> As Jamtis https://gist.github.com/tevador/50160d160d24cfc6c52ae02eb3d17024#64-checksum I have made a preliminary drive by and found a lot that I personally like and no problems
21:50:51 <ArticMine> This support if of course contingent on a strong consensus among the developers in favor, in particular when to comes to the security of the implementation
21:52:12 <ArticMine> Of course I cannot speak for the rest of the core team members.