[tor-dev] Proposals should have reviews. Let's make sure that happens. Here's a schedule.

[David Goulet]

On 14 Jan (11:18:26), Nick Mathewson wrote:
> So, one of the longstanding problems with Tor's (change) proposal
> system has been that proposals sit around for a long time without
> sufficient discussion or approval.  When they're about to be
> implemented, we do an informal "hey did anybody look at that?" check,
> but that's not really good enough.
> 
> Here's what I've been thinking of doing, as discussed at the tor dev
> IRC meeting yesterday.
> 
> 1. Everybody who will review proposals* should nominate one or two
> proposals currently in state "Open" or "Draft".  People should
> nominate proposals that they themselves didn't write.
> 
> 2. I'll schedule review & discussion sessions, about one per week,
> trying to hit times where interested people can make it.  Everybody
> who will review proposals* should try to show up if they can, having
> read the proposal or proposals under discussion for that week.  Then
> we talk about the proposal(s)!
> 
> 3. We'll try to move nominated proposals towards "Accepted" or
> "Rejected", improving them as necessary.
> 
> * I'm not going to be too elitist here, but:  If you show up and
> contribute usefully to discussions, I will prioritize your nominations
> more than I will prioritize nominations from people who don't
> contribute so much.
> 
> 
> This is a draft process, so we'll try to see after a month or two
> (possibly at the next face-to-face dev meeting?) how it's going.
> 
> Here's the schedule I have in mind for the  first meeting, based on
> proposals already nominated at the IRC dev meeting.  I'm going to go a
> bit aggressively for the first couple of weeks, so that we can get a
> sense of how this process works out.  Everything is subject to change.
> We'll be putting notes online from these meetings.
> 
>   Tuesday January 19:   11am Eastern (1600 UTC)
> 
>       Guard node proposals!  We'll be talking about these proposals:
>        Prop#259: New Guard Selection Behaviour [DRAFT]
>        Prop#241: Resisting guard-turnover attacks [DRAFT]
>        Prop#247:  Defending Against Guard Discovery Attacks using
> Vanguards [DRAFT]
> 
>   Friday January 22:   11 am Eastern (1600 UTC)
> 
>      Prop#251: Padding for netflow record resolution reduction [DRAFT]
> 
>   Monday January 25: 8pm Eastern (0100 UTC on Tuesday Jan 26)
> 
>       Prop#250: Random Number Generation During Tor Voting [DRAFT]
> 
>   Friday January 29:  8:30 am eastern (1330 UTC)
> 
>      Prop#252: Single Onion Services [DRAFT]
>      Prop#260: Rendezvous Single Onion Services [DRAFT]
>      Prop#246: Merging Hidden Service Directories and Introduction Points [OPEN]

Fosdem is the next day so I'll be at a remote location called Brussels
for this meeting for which I doubt I'll be able to attend. This one is
about onion service proposals and I would really want to discuss those
with others so moving this one before or after Febuary 2nd would be
great for me. If impossible, I'll read the notes I guess :).

Apart from that, this is great and looking forward to those sessions!

Big thanks Nick for organising this!
David

> 
> 
> Also nominated are:
> 
>     Prop#264: Putting version numbers on the Tor subprotocols [OPEN]
>     Prop#257: Refactoring authorities and taking parts offline [DRAFT]
>     Prop#258: Denial-of-service resistance for directory authorities [OPEN]
> 
> 
> -- 
> Nick
> _______________________________________________
> tor-dev mailing list
> tor-dev at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 603 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/attachments/20160114/a8cafee2/attachment-0001.sig>