Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

For April 2018 #68

cbeams opened this issue May 2, 2018 · 1 comment


None yet
1 participant
Copy link

commented May 2, 2018


Specify the total amount of BSQ you are requesting, and the BSQ address that amount should be paid to:

  • BSQ requested: 12000
  • BSQ address: B1HGxmhfWJwwvvDgTRrWpZ1QsEZn7rMEaVE

Contributions delivered

Provide links to contributions you have delivered, the amount of BSQ you are requesting for each, and any comments that will help stakeholders understand its value.

The list of contributions below was produced by reviewing the results of this GitHub issues query: org:bisq-network involves:cbeams updated:2018-04-01..2018-04-30.

The list below does not include activities that are a normal part of performing a given role. For example, I have not included conducting the April 4th-6th voting round, because this is a normal part of performing Compensation Maintainer role duties. Likewise, I have not included the work that I did to operate the @bisq_network Twitter handle, as this is part of the Twitter Admin role.

What follows, then, is work that I contributed wearing the hat of a normal contributor, i.e. work that anyone could have done without any of the rights or privileges or obligations that come with owning a specific role. For example, I've listed reviewing certain pull requests below, because that is work that any contributor can do. But merging pull requests is not included, because that is work that only maintainers can do.

I find it quite challenging to to assign itemized BSQ values to the items below. As I've argued in bisq-network/proposals#19, we must collectively get good at doing this, but it's going to take some practice, and it's going to take employing some good rules of thumb and heuristics to get there. As I mentioned in that proposal, I think that taking the amount of time spent on a given effort multiplied by one's hourly rate can be a good starting point for these values, but that we must ultimately check that against whether the amount reflects actual value added to the Bisq Network and its users. And we must find a way to do all of this without getting lost in time tracking and other non-productive overhead.

This month, I'm going with a single, high-level request of 12,000 BSQ, similar to the compensation requests I've filed over the previous months, but I'm going to do what I can to submit a more itemized compensation request next month.

As we grow and distribute roles more widely, it should get easier to do this. A big part of the challenge here is that we have so few people doing so many things, and that just makes things inherently hard to track and itemize. Perhaps it will remain not worth the trouble in the short term, I don't know. But I believe that the more we're all able to put our heads down and focus deeply on just a few things each month, the easier it will get to submit compensation requests for that work, and the better and more intuitive a sense we'll have for how much our work is worth. Let's see.

Contributions in progress

Provide links to work you're involved with that is still in progress. This section is optional, and is for your own benefit in keeping track of what you're doing and keeping other contributors up to date with the same.

  • Review DAO implementation with @ManfredKarrer
  • Release bisq-desktop v0.7.0 with @ripcurlx and @ManfredKarrer
  • Produce Getting Started with Bisq doc with @m52go
  • Reviewed many new asset listing PRs for inclusion in bisq-core (now bisq-assets)
    • But these are not yet delivered as bisq-desktop v0.7.0 has not yet been released.
  • Refactored / rewrote bisq-pricenode
    • I requested 6000 fewer BSQ than usual in compensation request #40 because I hadn't finalized my pricenode refactoring (bisq-network/bisq-pricenode#7). I have finished the work, but not every pricenode operator has upgraded yet, and so I'm deferring requesting compensation until that happens (which I'll take initiative on over the month to come). Basically, I don't consider this work to have been fully delivered yet.
  • Bisq brand design refresh

Roles performed

Provide links to your monthly report on any roles you are responsible for.

The following are new roles that I'll create over the next month and will initially own:

  • Design Maintainer
  • Assets Maintainer
  • Common Maintainer
  • P2P Maintainer
  • Core Maintainer
  • Desktop Maintainer
    • This is already done, we just renamed the JavaFX UI Developer role to this, with @ripcurlx having primary ownership

The following are roles where I play a secondary role, and do not (necessarily) do monthly reports:

Notes to self

The list of roles above was generated by the following ghi command run within my clone of the bisq-network/roles repository:

ghi list --assignee=cbeams --no-labels \
| grep -v '^#' \
| cut -b7- | rev | cut -d' ' -f3- | rev | sort \
| xargs -Irole echo " - role: "

Also useful to opening all of these issues is the following command:

for role in $(\
ghi list --mine \
  | grep -v '^#' \
  | cut -d'[' -f1 \
  | sed 's/^ *//' | sed 's/  /:/' \
  | awk -F':' '{print $2 ":" $1}' \
  | sort | cut -d':' -f2\
); do ghi show --web $role; done;

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented May 8, 2018

Closing as complete, see #58 (comment).

@cbeams cbeams closed this May 8, 2018

cbeams added a commit that referenced this issue May 30, 2018

Update compensation request issue template
This change updates the compensation request issue template to reflect
the sections I used in my request last month at #68. It more clearly
distinguishes between delivered work and works in progress and calls out
a separate section for roles performed.

The goal is that this change is being made in time for most
@bisq-network/contributors who intend to submit compensation requests
for the June 1st–3rd voting round at #70 (several have already
submitted, and so will miss this template change, but can adapt
their existing requests accordingly if they like).

This was referenced May 30, 2018

@cbeams cbeams referenced this issue Jun 30, 2018


For June 2018 #89

6 of 6 tasks complete
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.