Celo All-Core Devs Call 1

[YazzyYaz]

Celo All-Core Devs Call 1

• When: Thursday, October 29th, 2020, 4 PM UTC/12 PM EST/9 AM PST, 90 minutes max
• Where: Celo Zoom Event (Instructions on joining found in the calendar event below)
• Calendar Event: Add to your calendar here
• Focus: Activating CIP Process and Initial Talks about Celo's First Hardfork. Contracts discussions and adding Meta CIPs for activated Ethereum-based forks.

Agenda

• Client Team Checkin
• Activating CIP-0000: Celo Improvement Proposal Process
• Electing New CIP Editors
• Overview of New CIP template
• Adding Meta CIPs for activated Ethereum-based forks.
• Initial Discussions Of the Celo Hardfork and scheduling future Celo ACD calls.
• CIP10 Discussion
• CIP 20 PR
• Governable Lookback Window (CIP-0021)

  Governance

• CGP-11 Post Mortem Report
• CGP-14 cUSD Rewards

Please post all relevant proposals below that should be discussed and evaluated

[nambrot]

I'd like to discuss CIP10 (https://github.com/celo-org/celo-proposals/pull/17) cc @kphed

[nambrot]

In relation to the CGP11 issue, I think it would probably be a good idea to review the incident document https://docs.google.com/document/d/11oKD073WIp4nd87_I_lt-RIlWa0gscpM5_MhqNoi-Ng/edit?ts=5f89dc29#

[mcortesi]

Discuss https://github.com/celo-org/celo-proposals/pull/48 cc @andres-dg

[prestwich]

would be good to get feedback on CIP20 #44

[clrblmt]

would also like to add to agenda a first draft of CGP-14 "cUSD Rewards" for early Celo Dollar adopters https://github.com/celo-org/celo-proposals/pull/58 cc: @ewilz

[YazzyYaz]

Meeting Notes

(thanks to @devme25 for taking notes!)

Yaz: Client Checkin for celo-blockchain

Mariano: representing celo-blockchain

Yaz: Going to go over items in the agenda and the CIP process documents Explains the CIP Process Document

Viktor: How is the CIP process different from the CGP?

Yaz: CGP is more for changing parameters like Gas limits, etc

James: CIP will be the source of truth:

• ex: upper and lower boundaries for gas limits
• Sanity checks
• Development of the protocol itself. E.g.: maybe we have a different language

Viktor: Why do we want to structure the governance this way - CIP vs CGP

• Is there more clear dilenation between CIP and CGP
• Currently we don’t have a document
• Rough consensus - how to move decisions to change parameters using rough consensus

Victor: Also parameters are adjustable without hard forks

• CIP might require hard fork - change to the Celo client
• This will allow more flexibility

Or: Merging code from upstream Geth - how do we merge code from a process point of view

Yaz: We should have a meta-CIP that specifies with EIP is implemented and which is not implemented

James: We want to have a public source of truth for what is and what isn’t implemented

Yaz: Do we have consensus on this CIP-0000:

Viktor: Can we have more time to review it?

Yaz: Give 1-2 weeks?

James: The goal is not to slow things down but something that is documented and public - move things that already within cLabs process and making it public

Yaz: We will give folks a week to review the docs

James: We will use the CIP channel on Discord to spread the word and communicate

Viktor: Discord is really hard to find details, search, etc and not user friendlyCan we use another mode - forum or a Github request?

Yaz: I will create a forum post and we can use that to track comments and feedback. I will also a add Meta CIP - things that were already implemented based on Ethereum. I will bring this to the next call to activate the process

Yaz: Celo hard fork Will be called Donut due to community feedback.

Yaz: Let’s go over CIP 10

Nam: CIP 10 to Generalize signer authorization; also allow smart contracts to be able to sign

• This is a significant change to the network
• Falls into Ring 1
• There are a few details that need to be looked at. And come up with a deployment plan
• What other things will this affect? Some details need to be filled in

Yaz: This is WIP and not yet draft. Once it goes to Draft that it will be eligible for Last Call

James: Moving Draft to Last Call is the only thing that requires rough consensus

• Once it moves to Last Call, it is more likely to move to Accepted from there
• Last call: When CIP moves from Default rejected to default accepted

Yaz: Rough Consensus: Using the definition as per IETF. The gist is it’ll fall between 51%-99%

• We determine something is rough conensus only after we make sure it’s technically sound first

James: All Core Dev calls

• For things not controversial 1 week tor review and get to rough consensus the following week
• For controversial changes, more time is needed
• Changes will go much smoother if everybody comes prepared

Yaz: Let’s go over CIP 20

James: CIP-20 Relatively simple precompile

• Goal: provide a bunch of different hash function under a single umbrella
• The functions are all secure hash function from a technical perspective
• Gas costs? Not yet defined
• James wants to come up with a process to quantify how much cost based on certain hardware in use
• Part of the process should be to define a benchmark
• Requesting feedback

Victor: Avoid resource heavy (memory hard) hash functions that are common in crypto - maybe explicitly ban them. Other ex: non standard functions, things not available in Go, etc

Kevin: If one precompile contains all the hash functions, will all function cost the same:

James: No

Yaz: Let’s all review the WIP draft of CIP 20 and discuss it more on the next ACD call. Let’s go to CIP 21

Andres: It is a hard fork change - Ring 0

Mariano: Can we make two things separately:

• Change to layer 1
• Change to smart contract

James: Like to see a safe min and max value for it - needs to be added to the proposal

Yaz: Use Governance proposal to update the parameter

James: Seems reletaviely non-controversialFor posterity, it’ll be good to add things what not to do

Victor: Edgecases: think about examples and address them

Yaz: Let’s go to CGP 14

Emily: cUSD yields to Valora holders from the Community Fund smart contract to encourage engagement on the platform.

James: Let’s have a separate governance process for the whys of a governance proposal with the technical details of the proposal to be standardized as a process within the ACD call.

Yaz: I will schedule a Governance Call with the community to go over the whys of CGP-14 and any process that is needed for it will come back to the CIP process as a Ring-4 best-practices or CRC.

Yaz: Nam to go over the CGP-11 Post Mortem

Nam: CGP-11 issue was a typo in the gasLimit cost set. We need to start specifying tests we can do within celocli and for the process to minimize errors moving forward.

Yaz: Nam please share the document of your analysis into this.

Yaz: Thank you all for a great first All-Core Dev Call. I’ll be scheduling the next ACD call and add it to the Celo Signal mailing list to update you all.

[YazzyYaz]

Action Items

• Move CIP-0000 to Last Call which expires November 5th (1 week from today)
• Make a Forum Post to Discuss CIP-0000
• Schedule Governance Call to Discuss the Why of CGP-14
• Review Proposals CIP-10, CIP-20, CIP-21 more.

After CIP-0000 Goes from Last Call to Active

• Add Meta CIP Drafts for Implemented EIPs that are Final in Celo Blockchain
• Add Meta CIP Draft for Donut Hardfork

[YazzyYaz]

New ACD Call Ticket: https://github.com/celo-org/celo-proposals/issues/63

[YazzyYaz]

Video of the call: https://youtu.be/w-PX9ltvGnQ