Proposals Maintainer #30
Comments
2017.12 reportThere was no activity around proposals this month. |
2018.01 reportWe 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. |
2018.02 reportJust one new proposal this month, around building native mobile apps. It's only an issue at this point and could use more feedback: bisq-network/proposals#4 |
2018.03 reportWe 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. |
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 bisq-network/bisq-docs#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. |
2018.05 reportAs 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. |
2018.06 reportI 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. |
2018.06 reportThanks, @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. |
2018.07 reportI 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: |
Cycle 44 ReportHad a tidy up of proposals this cycle. 1 proposal was opened:Would be great if users can give their vote / feedback on this as it is the culmination of a series of proposals and now has a budget estimation of approximately $20,000 USD for @jmacxx to do the dev work required to implement. 0 proposals were rejected:2 proposals were accepted:
There are a couple of proposals outstanding that could also do with being closed this cycle. Please give your feedback on them if you would like to do so:
|
Cycle 45 ReportBusy cycle for proposals being opened. Please share any comments you have on the relevant proposals. 5 proposal were opened:
2 proposals were rejected:
1 proposal was accepted: |
Cycle 46 Report4 new proposals this cycle, one of which has already been accepted. No other proposal activity. Please comment on any open proposals of which you have input for. 3 proposals were opened:
0 proposals were rejected:1 proposal was accepted: |
Cycle 47 ReportQuiet cycle for proposal this cycle. Only one was opened at the end of last cycle regarding trade fees which was accepted by DAO vote. The proposal to Limit trade size to refundagent refund size needs actioning can one of the @bisq-network/dev's action this please. 1 proposal was rejected / superseded:2 proposals were accepted: |
Cycle 48 ReportQuiet cycle for proposal this cycle. The accepted proposal to Limit trade size to refundagent refund size still needs actioning can one of the @bisq-network/dev's action this please. 2 proposals were opened:There was no other activity. |
Cycle 49 ReportDid a little bit of tidying up the open proposals this cycle. 1 proposal was opened:3 proposals were closed: |
Cycle 50 ReportSome good proposals opened this cycle for discussion. 4 proposals were opened:
No proposals were accepted / rejected this cycle: |
Cycle 51 ReportHere is the report for the proposal activity from Cycle 51 3 proposals were opened:
1 proposal was rejected this cycle:2 proposals were approved cycle: |
Cycle 52 ReportQuiet cycle for proposals for this cycle. Good time to remind users to comment / upvote / downvote any of the current open issues. 0 proposals were opened:0 proposals were rejected this cycle:1 proposal was approved cycle: |
Cycle 53 ReportBusy cycle for proposals for this cycle with users making proposals to bond roles for Bisq 2. 7 proposals were opened:@brokenmoney Application to become a moderator for Bisq 2 2 proposals were rejected this cycle:@clearwater-trust BSQ Affiliate Program 0 proposals were approved cycle: |
Cycle 54 ReportAll proposals voted on by the DAO for new Bisq 2 roles were accepted this cycle. 2 proposals were opened:@pazza83 Plan for Projects Maintainer role: First Stage 0 proposals were rejected this cycle:13 proposals were approved cycle:@gabernard Bisq2 Security Manager |
Cycle 55 ReportQuiet cycle for proposals. 0 proposals were opened:0 proposals were rejected this cycle:1 proposals were approved cycle: |
Cycle 56 ReportQuiet cycle for proposals. 1 proposals were opened:@403State Application to become a bonded pricenode operator 0 proposals were rejected this cycle:2 proposals were approved cycle:@MwithM BSQ trading fee update on Cycle 55 |
Cycle 57 ReportQuiet cycle for proposals. 1 proposals were opened:@salokiam Show a Warning for potentially misconfigured network settings 0 proposals were rejected this cycle:1 proposals were approved cycle: |
Docs: https://docs.bisq.network/proposals.html#maintainer
Team: @bisq-network/proposals-maintainers
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: