Olaoluwa Osuntokun [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2021-11-03 📝 Original message: Oh, also there's ...
📅 Original date posted:2021-11-03
📝 Original message:
Oh, also there's currently this sort of placeholder logo from waaay back
that's used as the org's avatar/image. Perhaps it's time we roll an
"official" logo/avatar? Otherwise we can just switch over the randomly
generated blocks thingy that Github uses when an account/org has no
avatar.
-- Laolu
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:34 PM Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laolu32 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Circling back to close the loop here:
>
> * The new Github org (https://github.com/lightning) now exists, and all
> the
> major implementation maintainers have been added to the organization as
> admins.
>
> * A new blips repo (https://github.com/lightning/blips) has been
> created to
> continue the PR that was originally started in the lightning-rfc
> repo.
>
> * The old lightning-rfc repo has been moved over, and been renamed to
> "bolts"
> (https://github.com/lightning/bolts -- should it be all caps? )
>
> Thanks to all that participated in the discussion (particularly in
> meatspace
> during the recent protocol dev meetup!), happy we were able to resolve
> things
> and begin the next chapter in the evolution of the Lightning protocol!
>
> -- Laolu
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:49 AM Fabrice Drouin <fabrice.drouin at acinq.fr>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 at 21:57, Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laolu32 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Also note that lnd has _never_ referred to itself as the "reference"
>> > implementation. A few years ago some other implementations adopted that
>> > title themselves, but have since adopted softer language.
>>
>> I don't remember that but if you're referring to c-lightning it was
>> the first lightning implementation, and the only one for a while, so
>> in a way it was a "reference" at the time ?
>> Or it could have been a reference to their policy of "implementing the
>> spec, all the spec and nothing but the spec" ?
>>
>> > I think it's worth briefly revisiting a bit of history here w.r.t the
>> github
>> > org in question. In the beginning, the lightningnetwork github org was
>> > created by Joseph, and the lightningnetwork/paper repo was added, the
>> > manuscript that kicked off this entire thing. Later
>> lightningnetwork/lnd was
>> > created where we started to work on an initial implementation (before
>> the
>> > BOLTs in their current form existed), and we were added as owners.
>> > Eventually we (devs of current impls) all met up in Milan and decided to
>> > converge on a single specification, thus we added the BOLTs to the same
>> > repo, despite it being used for lnd and knowingly so.
>>
>> Yes, work on c-lightning then eclair then lnd all began a long time
>> before the BOLTs process was implemented, and we all set up repos,
>> accounts...
>> I agree that we all inherited things from the "pre-BOLTS" era and
>> changing them will create some friction but I still believe it should
>> be done. You also mentioned potential admin rights issues on the
>> current specs repos which would be solved by moving them to a new
>> clean repo.
>>
>> > As it seems the primary grievance here is collocating an implementation
>> of
>> > Lightning along with the _specification_ of the protocol, and given
>> that the
>> > spec was added last, how about we move the spec to an independent repo
>> owned
>> > by the community? I currently have github.com/lightning, and would be
>> happy
>> > to donate it to the community, or we could create a new org like
>> > "lightning-specs" or something similar.
>>
>> Sounds great! github.com/lightning is nice (and I like Damian's idea
>> of using github.com/lightning/bolts) and seems to please everyone so
>> it looks that we have a plan!
>>
>> Fabrice
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20211102/4644941c/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:
Oh, also there's currently this sort of placeholder logo from waaay back
that's used as the org's avatar/image. Perhaps it's time we roll an
"official" logo/avatar? Otherwise we can just switch over the randomly
generated blocks thingy that Github uses when an account/org has no
avatar.
-- Laolu
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:34 PM Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laolu32 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Circling back to close the loop here:
>
> * The new Github org (https://github.com/lightning) now exists, and all
> the
> major implementation maintainers have been added to the organization as
> admins.
>
> * A new blips repo (https://github.com/lightning/blips) has been
> created to
> continue the PR that was originally started in the lightning-rfc
> repo.
>
> * The old lightning-rfc repo has been moved over, and been renamed to
> "bolts"
> (https://github.com/lightning/bolts -- should it be all caps? )
>
> Thanks to all that participated in the discussion (particularly in
> meatspace
> during the recent protocol dev meetup!), happy we were able to resolve
> things
> and begin the next chapter in the evolution of the Lightning protocol!
>
> -- Laolu
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:49 AM Fabrice Drouin <fabrice.drouin at acinq.fr>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 at 21:57, Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laolu32 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Also note that lnd has _never_ referred to itself as the "reference"
>> > implementation. A few years ago some other implementations adopted that
>> > title themselves, but have since adopted softer language.
>>
>> I don't remember that but if you're referring to c-lightning it was
>> the first lightning implementation, and the only one for a while, so
>> in a way it was a "reference" at the time ?
>> Or it could have been a reference to their policy of "implementing the
>> spec, all the spec and nothing but the spec" ?
>>
>> > I think it's worth briefly revisiting a bit of history here w.r.t the
>> github
>> > org in question. In the beginning, the lightningnetwork github org was
>> > created by Joseph, and the lightningnetwork/paper repo was added, the
>> > manuscript that kicked off this entire thing. Later
>> lightningnetwork/lnd was
>> > created where we started to work on an initial implementation (before
>> the
>> > BOLTs in their current form existed), and we were added as owners.
>> > Eventually we (devs of current impls) all met up in Milan and decided to
>> > converge on a single specification, thus we added the BOLTs to the same
>> > repo, despite it being used for lnd and knowingly so.
>>
>> Yes, work on c-lightning then eclair then lnd all began a long time
>> before the BOLTs process was implemented, and we all set up repos,
>> accounts...
>> I agree that we all inherited things from the "pre-BOLTS" era and
>> changing them will create some friction but I still believe it should
>> be done. You also mentioned potential admin rights issues on the
>> current specs repos which would be solved by moving them to a new
>> clean repo.
>>
>> > As it seems the primary grievance here is collocating an implementation
>> of
>> > Lightning along with the _specification_ of the protocol, and given
>> that the
>> > spec was added last, how about we move the spec to an independent repo
>> owned
>> > by the community? I currently have github.com/lightning, and would be
>> happy
>> > to donate it to the community, or we could create a new org like
>> > "lightning-specs" or something similar.
>>
>> Sounds great! github.com/lightning is nice (and I like Damian's idea
>> of using github.com/lightning/bolts) and seems to please everyone so
>> it looks that we have a plan!
>>
>> Fabrice
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20211102/4644941c/attachment.html>;