Period between 2022-10-23 and 2022-11-23 inclusive
- These reports: https://github.com/rphair/cip-editing
- GitHub activity overview: https://github.com/rphair
- Cardano Forum overview: https://forum.cardano.org/u/COSDpool
- Discord invite to CIP Editors Meetings: https://discord.gg/kyaTyzkBqd
CIP pull requests @rphair involved in, by last update time = 43 in this period
CIP issues @rphair involved in, by last update time = 2 in this period
Cardano Forum CIP topics @COSDpool posted in since beginning of period = 3 addressed in this period
Open pull requests (https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pulls) = 49
Open issues (https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/issues) = 19
Several CIPs were posted this month involving aspects of Cardano governance, with vigorous discussion on GitHub about how to maintain community consensus amid expansion of Cardano capabilities as well as decoupling authoritative power from Cardano entities; there was a lot of material this month to be read, indexed & shared in anticipation of our meetings & reviews of these proposals:
- Tiered Pricing Protocol #381
- A proposal for entering the Voltaire phase #380 (CIP-1694?)
- Implement Ouroboros Leios to increase Cardano throughput #379
- Enforceable royalties #378
- Extended Local Chain Sync Protocol #375
- Pointer Address Removal #374
- Smart tokens #382
A few of these represent work in progress by IOG for months which is now being posted as community audiable standards, which is a matter of progress & credibility for the CIP process itself. There are also some proposals which could be considered potentially detrimental to Cardano's design goals, so are being vigorously discussed by stakeholders. There was probably more GitHub activitiy in the last 3 months on the CIP GitHub than in the previous 3 months put together.
Work proceeds also on the CIP-0001 revision, pending some issues of original authorship which have created an ethical deadlock & about which I've recommended some compromises. It's expected that this discussion will resolve soon, which will bring the new CPS (Cardano Problem Statement) to the public eye... which will be suitable to redefine & keep the community working on problems that have no immediate, direct solution that can be documented as a CIP would.
Finally some issues outside the scope of the CIP process have also been presented as "governance" issues and it has fallen to me to keep discussion of these alive as well, rather than simply dismissing them. It is important that our community retain a proper notion of "governance" as it differs from "governance", while being assertive about the CIP process itself without giving any creditbility to critics who've suggested our process is overly bureaucratic because we are insisting upon some basic rules about what the CIP process is & isn't.
CIP-???? | Parameterised Reference Scripts (cardano-foundation/CIPs#354)
- very thin proposal: we can't understand it; no path for implementation or communication with Plutus / core team.
- Matthias commented after meeting: even for a draft we still would want a Path to Active for such a proposal.
CIP-???? | DApp Registration (cardano-foundation/CIPs#355)
- No Rationale or Path to Active ("how do you intend to implement it"?)
- "Work in Progress" - wait for author to come back with update; then we can do a full review.
CIP-???? | Oracle Datum Standard (cardano-foundation/CIPs#357)
- Good collaboration between independent developers working on oracle projects... first oracle CIP.
- Good balance of cooperation & competition between different methods.
CIP-???? | Set minPoolCost to 0 (cardano-foundation/CIPs#358)
- (my opinion) a not very good rephrase of a 2 year old idea. CIP is mostly rhetoric about decentralisation.
- Q: as M says, if we were to merge this, what Status would it be merged with?
- Kevin Hammond says: SPO survey says:
- preferred options for increasing K parameter & changing minimum fee or pegging it to currency figure (dollar).
- Will be released 2 days from this time.
- Can be held up for a vote with tools like on Cardanoscan.
CIP-???? | Fair Stakepool Rewards (cardano-foundation/CIPs#360)
- A more elaborate system which is getting support from community with some stages for adoption.
- Will need complete endorsement from IOG before it can be implemented... will have marketing & tokenomic implications. Nobody will be able to make IOG do this, so no point discussing it without them.
These last 2 RSS proposals should be merged as Proposed while:
- workshops between IOG & SPOs "vote" around details
- indicate Path to Active saying that agency (generally IOG) is responsible for implementing them.
CIP ???? | No Datum Is Unit (cardano-foundation/CIPs#364)
- Michael doesn't like it... discussion still pending.
- Some overlap (philosophically) with Sebastien's current proposal (Michael commented for same reason).
CIP-???? | Hash-Checked Data (cardano-foundation/CIPs#363)
- Plutus needs to be extended to overcome some problems with how the ledger works in some circumstances.
- Commentary on GitHub currently explains technical differences: maybe for Stack Exchange to work out some details.
- TO GET Jared to comment on the suggestion that there were "ledger holes" ... since M says it's not really a limitation of Plutus but rather one of the Ledger.
CIP-???? | add Identity to Stake Pools
- (missed due to 5 minutes my Discord server connection went down)
CIP-0069? | Plutus Script Type Uniformization (cardano-foundation/CIPs#321)
-
Ben from Mlabs says this is great for developers... including those coming from other blockchains.
-
Matthias says it's fine with the people on the Plutus team.
-
BUT haven't discussed implementation plan yet, or which of them would be responsible for it...
- i.e. that's the next step to agree upon this & design, and then document it in the CIP.
-
Requires new Plutus language version (next would be v3)
-
Ben will engage relevant parties & do this (per Frederic question, can't merge as Proposed until has complete Plan to Active... it will be thin until Ben etc. get the details)
CIP-???? | Non-Fungible Token (NFT) Proxy Voting Standard (cardano-foundation/CIPs#351)
- Review taking place on GitHub; author responsive & adding precision to the CIP, so well on its way.
- For Path to Active... there needs to be some adoption (or proposal to) some active NFT projects.
- According to Matthias, confirming all comments have been addressed, it can be merged now (pending last check for resolution of all conversations, except matters of opinion?) set to Active later & merged as Proposed now.
CIP process itself (+ CPS) cardano-foundation/CIPs#366 - CIP1 and "minus one" (9999)
- IOG really wants it to move forward [I observed they were very involved in the drafting process]
- We should merge it at the next meeting, especially since now the "original authorship" question has been answered (by keeping original CIP1 principal author in the new header).
CIP-0057? | Plutus Smart-Contract Blueprints (cardano-foundation/CIPs#258)
- coming up again from a while back... want other interesting parties (Mlabs) to join discussion. Would be good to come back to it when there are some tools consuming this format, to demonstrate usefulness.
- Also working on associated tooling.
CIP-0049? | NFT metadata extension tag (cardano-foundation/CIPs#343)
- will work better as an extension to CIP-0025 - to invite CIP25 author to do that (if not clear from what M said) - will add comment to clarify that's why we're leaving this open.
CIP-???? | Smart Contract Software Licenses (cardano-foundation/CIPs#185)
- leaving open for author to take to final step (Matthias will know how to phrase it)
- TO NOTIFY AUTHOR this is scheduled for closure.
CIP-0041? | UPLC Serialization Optimizations (cardano-foundation/CIPs#314)
- leaving this to the Plutus team, and plan to review in the future as soon as at least 1 person at the Plutus team has looked it over.
- They should also be asked to look at this if they're working on Plutus at a low level.
- Can't merge as Proposed unless this happens (M has asked them to review before & will ask again; some progress has been made by Michael).
CIP-0069? | Plutus Script Type Uniformization (cardano-foundation/CIPs#321)
- one of the authors (Zygomeb / Maximilien [in CIP but not widely known]) is present.
- DONE notifying users on Forum of the naming conflict, with attention of moderators.
- technical review on details with author... keeping for review in future meeting.
CIP-0058? | Bitwise primitives (cardano-foundation/CIPs#283) - Matthias thinks this is very complete, the second draft with a lot of work on it & looks complete, solid & well written with a clear motivation, use cases & applications.
- Mlabs & Plutus team would be interested... Maximilien confirms these are also included in Plutus (but weren't included in Vasil hard fork).
- Just need to fix typos and things like that.
(not on agenda) cardano-foundation/CIPs#250
- author just walked in although this one not on agenda... merging as proposed because it's already being used in Plutus V2, and as soon as that becomes active on mainnet it can be updated to "active" (Inigo will submit a further PR with the stage change when it comes up).
discussion of next meeting agenda - M agrees we can have next agenda for PoS system updates.
- Matthias would like to get that group on board for the next editor meeting.
- covering part of this agenda in this meeting: most of them are coming in to remove the min fee but some compromises to lower it progressively... with some also raising the K parameter.
- This problem is coming up because we can't talk with people who are controlling parameters... therefore some requests seem to be "all or nothing" (if they change K there's no guarantee they could change it again).
- I pointed out that some CIP authors (e.g. 50) wanted a "catalyst vote" but perhaps that could be resticted to SPOs... but then again they aren't the only stakeholders... M says we need MORE VISIBILITY above all.
- renaming on CIP Discord to get something easier to type & share & hopefully compete with dead end Twitter discussions. (now called "rewards-sharing-scheme-discussions")
- NOTIFIED forum threads / github messages that the channel name has changed (can be found much more easily now)