search

bisq-network / roles

@bisq-network contributor roles
https://bisq.wiki/Roles
15 stars 16 forks source link

Proposals Maintainer #30

Open cbeams opened 6 years ago

cbeams commented 6 years ago

Docs: https://docs.bisq.network/proposals.html#maintainer Team: @bisq-network/proposals-maintainers

cbeams commented 6 years ago

2017.12 report

There was no activity around proposals this month.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#26

cbeams commented 6 years ago

2018.01 report

We had one new proposal issue this month around how to turn Bisq nodes into Lightning nodes, and it's begun to get some activity. See bisq-network/proposals#3.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#35

cbeams commented 6 years ago

2018.02 report

Just one new proposal this month, around building native mobile apps. It's only an issue at this point and could use more feedback: https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/4

/cc bisq-network/compensation#40

cbeams commented 6 years ago

2018.03 report

We had an uptick in new proposals over the month of March (some of which were my own), but not a lot of resolution / coming to consensus about them. To a certain degree, it's fine for proposals to hang around for a while, in order for people to have time to read, think about, and respond to them, but at a certain point, proposals basically "go cold" and either need to be brought back to life or closed due to inactivity. I'm not sure about what to do here, process-wise, but in any case, I think we want the proposal process to have a high degree of integrity, where people who submit proposals are fully responsible for their resolution (one way or another), and proposals don't "die on the vine" due to inattention.

I'll make a point to care for my proposals in this way over the coming month; perhaps others can do the same.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#57

cbeams commented 6 years ago

2018.04 report

@cbeams wrote a proposal on refining the proposal process, which was approved and led to putting together the https://docs.bisq.network/proposals.html doc in https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq-docs/pull/40. This new doc defines the proposals process and all @bisq-network/contributors are encouraged to read and understand it.

There were a number of other proposals accepted and rejected this month, and several proposals remain open right now. In the future come, these monthly maintainer updates will recap the proposals that were created, accepted and rejected throughout the month.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#68

cbeams commented 6 years ago

2018.05 report

As can be seen in the results of this query:

I believe the proposals process is working quite well now, and it's reasonable to believe it'll only get better from here as more contributors get familiar with it.

One potential area for improvement, though, is around reviewing proposals. On average we're getting just 3–5 reactions to proposals. If that is a reflection of how many contributors actually care about each proposal, then that's fine (we don't want people wasting their time weighing on on stuff they don't know about or don't care about), but if these numbers are a reflection of the fact that people just don't know that the proposals are there, or haven't prioritized reading through them, then it would be good to get more engagement. Be sure to watch the repository if you're not already doing so.

If you have feedback on this process, please speak up. You can do that in a comment here, in the `#proposals' Slack channel, or in an issue on the proposals repository.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#74

ManfredKarrer commented 6 years ago

2018.06 report

I took over primary ownership of that role that month.

Unfortunately there is still not a lot of discussion and feedback on most of the proposals. We need to try to spread that better to the other channels and invite people to actively participate in the discussion.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#92

cbeams commented 6 years ago

2018.06 report

Thanks, @ManfredKarrer and @ripcurlx for agreeing to temporarily take on this role, but on review, I don't think it makes sense to hand it off. Proposals are a vital part of how we do things, and I'm happy to continue caring for the process there until someone shows up who is really eager to take it over.

I think it's much better, @ManfredKarrer, for you in particular to spend your time with proposals either (a) submitting your own proposals (as you've done to good effect a number of times now) or (b) reviewing others' proposals. The actual duties of Proposals Maintainer are quite easy, so I'll keep doing them for now.

Note that I've clarified what those duties are in the Proposals doc. It hasn't been merged yet, but you can see a draft here: https://deploy-preview-46--bisq-docs.netlify.com/proposals.html#duties

I've updated the description of this issue to reflect what I've written above.

/cc bisq-network/compensation#89

cbeams commented 5 years ago

2018.07 report

I have been behind in my proposals maintainer duties over the last couple months, and let a few proposals linger longer than they should have without being closed or otherwise pushed along.

I've caught up now, however, on open proposals, including closing serveral, and will endeavor to keep up with the normal two-week review cycle going forward.

In the meantime, it's great to see all the productive ideas and conversation happening around proposals. Keep it coming!

BSQ requested: 150

/cc bisq-network/compensation#101

ManfredKarrer commented 5 years ago

I think we should reconsider a bit the close policy. I would prefer to close only proposals which got negative feedback or no attention at all. Though even those might have valuable content which even if not implemented soon might be useful for further ideas. I fear if they are closed they are kind of forgotten and harder to re-discover. To have more open stalled proposals gives us also the sign that there is much work open but due lack of resources they are stalled - which is largely the main issue with most proposals IMO.

cbeams commented 5 years ago

2018.08 report

I have not been actively managing proposals this month. Per @ManfredKarrer's request above, we're letting proposals stay open longer, and we can see how this goes over the next months.

BSQ Requested: 25

/cc bisq-network/compensation#114

cbeams commented 5 years ago

2018.09 report

Discussion continued this month around bisq-network/proposals#35 and bisq-network/proposals#38. On the former, we decided not to enforce a listing fee, and on the latter we decided to allow compensation requests for work merged to master, not just work that has shipped in a release.

BSQ Requested: 25

/cc bisq-network/compensation#139

cbeams commented 5 years ago

2018.10 report

I've made @ManfredKarrer a secondary owner of this role, as he's been caring for proposals more than I lately, and indicated (a while ago) that he's fine with doing so.

I won't itemize the proposals added / updated this month here, but there are a good number of them. It seems that the approach we've taken to proposals works rather well so far.

BSQ Requested: 25

/cc bisq-network/compensation#160

cbeams commented 5 years ago

2018.11 report

I took no action around maintaining proposals this month, @ManfredKarrer did everything. Manfred, it probably makes sense for you to take the primary role here, since you've actually been performing that duty in practice for the last months are you good with that?

BSQ Requested: 0

cbeams commented 5 years ago

Per https://github.com/bisq-network/roles/issues/1#issuecomment-444857417, I'll be away for the next ~2 months. I've made @ManfredKarrer the primary owner of this role, which makes sense anyway as he's been doing the actual work of maintaining the issues there over the last months.

ManfredKarrer commented 5 years ago

@mpolavieja takes over primary role owner.

cbeams commented 4 years ago

There have been no updates on this role since late 2018. @mpolavieja, I know you do maintain the issues there. Could you please post regular cycle reports here?

It would also be good to review the role documentation at https://docs.bisq.network/proposals.html#maintainer to see if it's a match with what you're actually doing, and if anything needs to change. It would also be good to port that documentation to the wiki. There is already a stub at https://bisq.wiki/Proposals waiting for this transcription.

cbeams commented 4 years ago

@mpolavieja, ping?

cbeams commented 4 years ago

As the roles maintainer, I've just removed @mpolavieja as the owner of this role. There have been no cycle reports in more than one year since he ostensibly took over the role in May of 2019; I have pinged him twice here in comments above over the last two months with no response, and most importantly, his duties as proposals maintainer have gone unattended, leaving proposals languishing without proper closure, labeling, and other process. I've also added the help wanted label to indicate that we do in fact want someone to carry out this role; it's an important part of making the proposals process really work.

cbeams commented 3 years ago

Per discussion with @m52go, I've just assigned @mwithm to this role. It's my understanding that @MwithM has elsewhere agreed to take on the duties here (thanks!).

@MwithM, I'd suggest first doing a review of the role documentation at https://docs.bisq.network/proposals.html#maintainer (as mentioned in the description above), and:

The latter would probably benefit from some kind of conversation with DAO stakeholders. In any case, it should be clear to all involved what the actual duties of the role are, and what people should be able to expect from you. You've done a great job playing the compensation maintainer role, I'm glad to hear you're up for taking care of this one too.

cbeams commented 3 years ago

I've just assigned @MwithM to this role

Actually, I was unable to do this for some reason (I ran into this once before and the problem just resolved itself after a few days), so @mwithm is not yet actually assigned to this issue, but I have successfully added him to the @bisq-network/proposals-maintainers team.

cbeams commented 3 years ago

I was unable to [assign @MwithM to this isssue] for some reason

As per https://github.com/bisq-network/roles/issues/16#issuecomment-671527142, this mystery has been solved (thanks, @wiz), and I've just assigned @MwithM as planned.

I've also removed the help wanted label, as help has now officially arrived ;)

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Thanks for letting me have this role. Although he left this role, I know @mpolavieja is not away from Bisq, and that's great news. I hope I can provide to this role the impartiality it needs and make everyone follow the rules to successfully cooperate. I think Bisq would benefit if this role is driven by different contributors, so if after 6 cycles there's a voluntary, I'll happily let another contributor to take it.

Cycle 16 report

Compensation

This question wasn't previously discussed or written in docs: I'll request 50-100 USD for each cycle depending on workload. Proposals is part of the extinct Admin team. I'll ask @m52go to review compensation requests regarding this role. On this cycle I'm asking extra 50 USD for the creation of the wiki page and bringing the issues up to date.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 17 report

All proposals have been labelled. Older proposal is from 14 April. I don't think that forcing closure of issues makes any good, as closed issues tend to be forgotten and some proposal are long term focused or too complex to be solved in a couple weeks, so I consider this up to date.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 18 report

Many interesting new proposals have been created this period, some of them just ideas for future implementations. Maybe I should try to enforce closing stalled proposals.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 19 report

Not much to report. One proposal was reopened from stalled, a few were accepted and very interesting new ones are being discussed.

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 20 report

Basic maintainance. I'll try to close old proposals "next year".

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 22 report

Contributors filtered most of the old threads by themselves. I expect that ideas and non very explicit proposals will be opened at https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/discussions

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 23 report

MwithM commented 3 years ago

Cycle 24 report

MwithM commented 3 years ago

It's been more than 6 cycles, so I'm passing the baton to @pazza83 on the proposals maintainer role. @cbeams could you give him the necessary permissions on the proposals repo and remove mine? Thanks to the new proposals maintainer for taking the offer, I'm sure you'll do great.

pazza83 commented 3 years ago

Thanks @MwithM. I like the idea above of Bisq benefiting by having this role driven by different contributors, so I will also look to pass on the role after 6 cycles is there is a volunteer.

@cbeams let me know if you need anything from myself.

cbeams commented 3 years ago

@cbeams could you give [@pazza83] the necessary permissions on the proposals repo and remove mine?

Done and done. Thanks, all.

pazza83 commented 3 years ago

Cycle 25 Report

This was my first cycle as proposal maintainer.

This cycle I mainly tidied up the proposals. This resulted in about ~20-30 proposals being closed. Most of the closed ones had been superseded or had become stalled.

There are currently 9 open proposals.

My first impressions are:

To help with the former it would be great if everyone can give a quick reaction to the current 9 open proposals

👍: I agree with the proposal and want to see it enacted

😕: I am uncertain about the proposal and I need more information

👎: I disagree with the proposal and do not want to see it enacted

I think @refund-agent2 proposals are especially important as they has implications for all users / contributors.

Hopefully moving forwards with less open issues it will make it easier for people to contribute / engage on the issues.

I am looking forward to developing the role and will try and keep the proposals organized, also will have a think about how accepted proposals can be better connected to future work.

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 26 Report

This was a quiet cycle for proposals.

There are currently 6 open proposals. It would be great to get some more feedback from Bisq users and contributors on these proposal.

3 proposals where closed either as stalled or rejected.

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 27 Report

This was a quiet cycle for proposals.

No new proposals were open. I suggested one user open a proposal regarding trade fees but it has not been actioned yet.

4 proposals where closed as they were already in place and there was no one expressing opposing views.

Proposals are now empty with the exception of the BSQ trading fee update proposal which stays open and is updated / replaced as necessary.

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 28 Report

This was another quiet cycle for proposals.

There are 5 proposals open at present.

No proposals were closed this cycle.

2 proposals were added:

1 proposal was re-opened:

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 29 Report

This cycle there was lot of good discussion taking place on the mobile GUI proposal. This has now been set up in a new repository.

3 proposals were accepted:

2 new proposals were opened

@UX-P's proposal to add a new role - User Researcher @asvdf's proposal to allow custom fee for withdrawals

1 proposal was closed as invalid.

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 30 Report

There cycle there has been quite a bit of engagement on the 3 new proposals. As well as an existing proposal from @asvdf's proposal to Allow 1sat/vByte fee for withdrawals,

I think the proposal's process is currently working well.

3 new proposals were opened:

0 new proposals were accepted:

0 new proposals were accepted.

2 proposals were closed:

2 proposals were closed or moved due to not providing enough info and/or being incorrectly posted to proposals.

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 31 Report

Everything is going well with proposals. It is still getting some good user engagement on current proposals.

2 new proposals were opened:

In this cycle 2 new proposals were opened:

1 new proposal was accepted:

1 new proposals was accepted by DAO vote in cycle 30:

2 proposals were closed:

2 proposals were closed or moved due to not providing enough info and/or being incorrectly posted to proposals.

Following the closing of the proposal to list a new asset I exchanged messages with @MwithM who informs me they will make a proposal to create a policy for listing new assets. Better to have a policy than continually refer to asset listing on hold, especially when new assets have been added in this time, eg; USDT, L-BTC, RBTC, and GRIN

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 32 Report

This was a pretty quiet cycle. Main proposal was to start the migration from Keybase to Matrix. This has been accepted and is in progress.

2 new proposals were opened:

In this cycle 2 new proposals were opened:

3 proposals were accepted:

3 were accepted, the two below, plus the Matrix proposal above:

1 proposals was closed:

1 proposal was closed due to DAO vote.

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 33 Report

A busier cycle for proposals this cycle. Some good discussion happening on current proposals. Thanks for everyone that is following along and/or engaging in the discussion.

Please remember to comment on any of the open proposals if you have anything you would like to share. Also please give a thumbs up and down on the main post when appropriate.

6 new proposals were opened:

In this cycle 6 new proposals were opened:

2 proposals were accepted:

2 were accepted:

1 proposal was closed:

1 proposal was closed due to being stalled.

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 34 Report

Another active cycle for proposals. Lots of good discussion taking place. on current proposals. Please share your comments on any proposals or even react to them with any of the following:

6 new proposals were opened:

In this cycle 6 new proposals were opened:

2 proposals were accepted:

2 proposals were closed due to being accepted by DAO vote.

1 proposal was rejected:

1 proposal was closed due to being rejected:

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 35 Report

Pretty quite cycle for proposals.

1 new proposal was opened:

1 new proposal was opened:

It would also be good to get more feedback on a proposal opened at the end of last cycle:

4 proposals were accepted:

1 proposal was rejected:

1 proposal was closed due to being rejected:

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 36 Report

A quiet cycle for proposal this month.

1 new proposal was opened:

It would also be good to get more feedback on the current open proposals.

0 proposals were accepted:

0 proposal was rejected:

pazza83 commented 2 years ago

Cycle 37 Report

Not claiming anything in compensation for this cycle as there were no new proposals this cycle and I did not do any work on proposals this cycle.

pazza83 commented 1 year ago

Cycle 38 Report

Another quiet cycle for proposal this month.

1 new valid proposal was opened:

0 proposals were accepted:

1 proposal was rejected:

pazza83 commented 1 year ago

Cycle 39 Report

No new proposals this month. Did a bit of tidying up of the proposals repository.

pazza83 commented 1 year ago

Cycle 40 Report

A quiet cycle for proposals this month.

1 new valid proposal was opened:

1 proposal was accepted:

No proposals were rejected:

pazza83 commented 1 year ago

Cycle 41 Report

9 new proposals were opened this cycle, 2 of which were also closed in the cycle to be replaced by updated proposals for dealing with the Burning Man issue, proposals were; 383 and 385.

The 7 new proposals opened:

1 proposal was rejected:

No proposals were accepted:

The proposal to mitigate abandoned trade multisigs is awaiting the outcome of other proposal being discussed.