17:00:44 <gaba> #startmeeting
17:00:44 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Jun  1 17:00:44 2020 UTC.  The chair is gaba. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:44 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:52 <gaba> agenda here: https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2020.1-keep
17:00:54 <gaba> please review it
17:01:37 <nickm> (haven't heard whether Caitlin will be around for this one)
17:02:21 <nickm> i don't have any updates on the sponsors or reviews, except that i'm behind on reviews and hope to be caught up by the end of the week
17:02:43 <nickm> I've updated the status page to point at 0.4.4
17:02:52 <asn> ack ack
17:02:59 <gaba> thanks
17:03:05 <asn> fwiw, i assigned reviews. and assigned to both of them incidentally.
17:03:09 <nickm> asn: there are some things we could talk about a little if you want, or we could defer till we have more folks around
17:03:10 <asn> so done that.
17:03:25 <asn> nickm: yep im here
17:03:29 <nickm> gaba: I think the plan is for me and dgoulet to split the s55 tickets owned by teor
17:03:42 <gaba> nickm: ack
17:03:57 <nickm> and to put some of them as 'unassigned' if they aren't essential
17:04:19 <nickm> asn: ok. so i think i want to send an email asking people to work on triage for 0.4.4, and one about clang-format status.
17:04:35 <asn> ack
17:04:58 <nickm> we should still figure out what to do with all our proposal pile
17:05:23 <nickm> that one i don't have any ideas for
17:05:33 <nickm> for clang-format I'll basically just say where we're at and what we could do next
17:05:42 <gaba> can we start using some of Thursdays to discuss proposal by proposal?
17:05:49 <asn> gaba: good idea
17:05:56 <nickm> gaba: we could but some should have more people
17:06:03 <gaba> ok
17:06:05 <nickm> we could decide that those should have more people
17:06:16 <gaba> so maybe the monday meetings in irc
17:06:22 <gaba> that seems to be shorter
17:06:40 <gaba> when we send the notes to the mailing list we can say that next week we discuss proposal X
17:06:45 <nickm> for triage I'll mainly say "we should see if there's any "scheduled to be deferred from 0.4.4 that we actually want/need to keep"
17:06:58 <asn> nickm: i thiknk that makes sense
17:07:04 <nickm> ok
17:07:57 <asn> but yes i think using either mondays or thursdays to move forward on the open proposals sounds like a good plan
17:08:09 <nickm> maybe if we're hoping to advance stuff on thursday, we should ask people to have at least skimmed proposals by then?
17:08:37 <gaba> yes
17:08:45 <asn> works for me
17:08:52 <asn> perhaps we dont need to do all of them immediately
17:09:12 <asn> nickm: do u have any specific proposals in mind?
17:09:16 <asn> that perhaps are more important than other proposals?
17:09:27 <asn> perhaps we should touch those first
17:09:30 <nickm> I think we could do prop#315 in 0.4.4
17:09:50 <nickm> I hope we have consensus on prop#318 being "just do it"
17:10:19 <nickm> and I want to know from dgoulet whether he believes my feedback on prop#319
17:10:42 <nickm> finally, I'd like the team's perspective on whether we think prop#321 is viable
17:11:02 <nickm> (I think we havea  consensus not to do prop#320, and prop#322 is esoteric to the point we can ignore it0
17:11:06 <nickm> for now)
17:11:40 <nickm> that's all I've got, till walking onions lands (later today or early tomorrow, after proofreading is done)
17:11:49 <asn> aha
17:11:51 <gaba> what about starting prop#314 this Thursday and then we see there if we follow up the conversations in irc or not
17:11:54 * gaba brb
17:12:09 <asn> #314 was mentioned?
17:12:15 <asn> or u mean #315?
17:12:15 <nickm> 314 was already accepted
17:12:20 <asn> i guess #315
17:12:39 <asn> perhaps we can start with #315 and #318? i think we can def get that read until thur.
17:12:47 <nickm> ok. let's plan on that.
17:12:58 <asn> works for me1
17:12:59 <asn> !
17:13:01 <nickm> I'd love more feedback on the others if anybody has time, but I get that folks are busy
17:13:21 <asn> u want me to send an email to this effect?
17:13:23 <nickm> asn: can you send a quick note to the ml for dgoulet and ahf about those?
17:13:27 <asn> sounds good
17:13:31 <nickm> heh, yes please
17:13:34 <nickm> ok.
17:13:47 <nickm> do we have anything else for today?
17:13:50 <asn> im good
17:14:01 <nickm> what's the latest with pow, btw?
17:14:27 <asn> it was put a bit on hold while we were doing the funding proposal
17:14:29 <asn> but we are starting again now
17:14:35 <nickm> cool
17:14:35 <asn> i worked with dgoulet last week
17:14:37 <asn> on the scheduler
17:14:41 <asn> and the measurements that need to be done there
17:14:56 <asn> we are getting performance times for services handling INTRO cells
17:15:01 <nickm> I've been holding off on reading the proposal draft, but I'm excited to look at it whenever you let me know you're ready
17:15:07 <asn> to see the verificaiton overhead of PoW + how much we can tune it
17:15:09 <asn> sounds good :)
17:15:37 * gaba back -- sorry that was somebody at the door
17:16:01 <gaba> sounds good to me
17:16:11 <nickm> ok cool. Sounds like we're done with the meeting?
17:16:24 <gaba> yes
17:16:25 <nickm> if so, see you online everybody!
17:16:31 <gaba> #endmeeting