Author Topic: [Worker Proposal] Blockchain maintenance developer  (Read 45914 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dannotestein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
    • View Profile
    • BlockTrades International
  • BitShares: btsnow
Please help publish win binaries for release of 2.0.160223. Thanks  :)
It's up, thanks for the notification.
http://blocktrades.us Fast/Safe/High-Liquidity Crypto Coin Converter

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Please help publish win binaries for release of 2.0.160223. Thanks  :)
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline dannotestein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
    • View Profile
    • BlockTrades International
  • BitShares: btsnow
It's been suggested that we should report what issues we plan to work on, but this really isn't a simple thing to do reliably. Priorities of issues rapidly change as well as available people to work on them. It's much easier and more reasonable, IMO, to report what was done and what was charged.
I agree. Setting up and publishing an official schedule and keeping it up to date is unnecessary overhead that I wouldn't want to pay for. Regular reports of work done and how the payment was allocated to different tasks/workers is sufficient.
I think a weekly overview would make sense because it would:
... provide accountability
... be positive for the public and shareholder perception of the worker system and this specific worker

Has there been such documentation in the past? ...I think that would make sense for any worker.
Well, our github workflow makes it possible to see what's planned and some idea of who is doing what, although these things never tell the whole story, since few document systems relying on manual entry manage to track reality perfectly. That will be especially true whenever some release needs to get rushed out for a high priority issue. But, FWIW, on the blockchain side of things, this is probably the best documentation of current and near term planned work:

https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/milestones/NextRelease
http://blocktrades.us Fast/Safe/High-Liquidity Crypto Coin Converter

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
It's been suggested that we should report what issues we plan to work on, but this really isn't a simple thing to do reliably. Priorities of issues rapidly change as well as available people to work on them. It's much easier and more reasonable, IMO, to report what was done and what was charged.
I agree. Setting up and publishing an official schedule and keeping it up to date is unnecessary overhead that I wouldn't want to pay for. Regular reports of work done and how the payment was allocated to different tasks/workers is sufficient.

I think a weekly overview would make sense because it would:
... provide accountability
... be positive for the public and shareholder perception of the worker system and this specific worker

Has there been such documentation in the past? ...I think that would make sense for any worker. 

Offline bytemaster

CNX is working on blockchain technology and prioritizing its limited resources on activities we think will generate the most revenue in the shortest period of time.

For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan

This means that your team should actively help Theo on fixing and closing issues, not just pay him extra. I assume that Theo, being a CNX's dev, is already paid for his work.

I would like to see you/your team really making commits and fixing issues. This is what the shareholders expect from this worker IMO.

This assumption was already negatived in previous statements. We are a DAC and our only working manpower is what comes through the Workers.. the expectation of free labourers from CNX is not a reasonable assumption.

Negatived? You mean rejected?

Doesn't matter if you guys keep saying CNX shouldn't be expected to work on Graphene "for free", I certainly feel they should as it's in their interest (and I'm even a founding member and stock holder), and I'm pretty sure most people around here also think they should.

Sorry I meant negated... just woke up after only a few hrs sleep :)  Corrected.

In regards to free work.. where exactly should the funds come from then for them to work 'for free' if this is the case. I like to understand how their business model for man-hours should be paid then. What are the more ideal solutions that can work better?

I explained why I think they should work on Graphene above. You have to remember this isn't BTS only, it's Graphene, CNX's flagship and currently only product.

The answer is "yes" and "no".

Yes, CNX will, of course, work on Graphene -- when it is the best use of our shareholders' resources.
Just like other businesses may build certain BitShares infrastructure that they need to succeed.
That leaves lots of other things the the Business Known As BitShares can and should be responsible for.

Teenagers are well known for their desire for independence without responsibility.

BitShares is an emancipated adult and must take the responsibility that comes with the independence its shareholders crave.





Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Pheonike

Dannotestein
 "We are working on this feature that we listed in our plan"

Users
 "The blockchain is crashing!"

Dannotestein
"I would like to help, but we promised the trolls that would only work on this feature until it's complete"

Users
 "But if you don't change your priority for a moment  the blockchain will stop working"

Dannotestein
 "I would have to make a new plan a get the trolls approval first, should take a least  week because the trolls love to bash"

Users
 "We don't have a week!"

Dannotestein
"I tried to make the plan flexible for these scenarios but If I change priorities for something that is more important and urgent the trolls will vote us out for not sticking to the plan. So the blockchain must die so the trolls can be happy"



Offline pc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
    • Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko?
  • BitShares: cyrano
To inject some actual numbers into this discussion, for the work reported above, this worker has been paid ~$3250 USD in BTS. Of that, BlockTrades plans to charge $700 for the work we've done [...]. Given the work that CNX did during this period, I think it's quite reasonable for them to charge $2550.

Thanks. I think this kind of information is important, and these numbers look absolutely reasonable to me. It would be nice to see such a breakdown at the end of each month.

I don't think we're likely to see CNX doing development work for free. The best I think we can hope for is that they give us a discounted rate, which I think this represents.

+1

It's been suggested that we should report what issues we plan to work on, but this really isn't a simple thing to do reliably. Priorities of issues rapidly change as well as available people to work on them. It's much easier and more reasonable, IMO, to report what was done and what was charged.

I agree. Setting up and publishing an official schedule and keeping it up to date is unnecessary overhead that I wouldn't want to pay for. Regular reports of work done and how the payment was allocated to different tasks/workers is sufficient.
Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko? ISBN 978-3-8442-6568-2 http://bitcoin.quisquis.de

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Only product that you are aware off.

I was about to say the same. :) ... We have already been told about things like Plasma.. but there are other things they could be working on or focused on now that they are no longer welcome here if the forum remarks are any barometer on that matter. Sad really.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline dannotestein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
    • View Profile
    • BlockTrades International
  • BitShares: btsnow
To inject some actual numbers into this discussion, for the work reported above, this worker has been paid ~$3250 USD in BTS. Of that, BlockTrades plans to charge $700 for the work we've done (this includes more than just the time we spent on the windows build and issue 251, as we've had to spend time learning and discussing ways to improve the current workflow). Given the work that CNX did during this period, I think it's quite reasonable for them to charge $2550. SVK's feelings aside, I don't think we're likely to see CNX doing development work for free. The best I think we can hope for is that they give us a discounted rate, which I think this represents.

I certainly plan to increase the amount of time we can devote to this worker, but I know our next week is booked with updating our web site for our public offering, so I plan to make no charges during that time for BT. The one exception to that is if we wind up working on this issue: https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/591.

It's been suggested that we should report what issues we plan to work on, but this really isn't a simple thing to do reliably. Priorities of issues rapidly change as well as available people to work on them. It's much easier and more reasonable, IMO, to report what was done and what was charged. I'll evaluate what is done by CNX and us over the next period, then distribute accordingly, including returning funds if less was done than the worker provides for.

However, it is important that programmers know what issues other programmers are working on to avoid work duplication. For programmers, the answer for this is addressed in a new document I wrote recently to describe our updated workflow plans:
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/Graphene-GitHub-Guidelines

To answer abit's question, we did not have a chance to look at the "mobile spam" issue yet. From preliminary discussions with Theo and BM, we understand the nature of the problem, and the most likely solution will be one of examining the flow of data and coming up with some heuristics to reduce the flow. In other words, there's no simple "clean" solution. We're still planning to address this issue when we have a chance, but if you want to take a crack at it, assign it to yourself. If you can make a significant reduction, report it to us and we can work out some way to pay you for the work.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2016, 02:57:31 pm by dannotestein »
http://blocktrades.us Fast/Safe/High-Liquidity Crypto Coin Converter

Offline Pheonike

Only product that you are aware off.

Offline svk


This means that your team should actively help Theo on fixing and closing issues, not just pay him extra. I assume that Theo, being a CNX's dev, is already paid for his work.

I would like to see you/your team really making commits and fixing issues. This is what the shareholders expect from this worker IMO.

This assumption was already negatived in previous statements. We are a DAC and our only working manpower is what comes through the Workers.. the expectation of free labourers from CNX is not a reasonable assumption.

Negatived? You mean rejected?

Doesn't matter if you guys keep saying CNX shouldn't be expected to work on Graphene "for free", I certainly feel they should as it's in their interest (and I'm even a founding member and stock holder), and I'm pretty sure most people around here also think they should.

Sorry I meant negated... just woke up after only a few hrs sleep :)  Corrected.

In regards to free work.. where exactly should the funds come from then for them to work 'for free' if this is the case. I like to understand how their business model for man-hours should be paid then. What are the more ideal solutions that can work better?

I explained why I think they should work on Graphene above. You have to remember this isn't BTS only, it's Graphene, CNX's flagship and currently only product.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode


This means that your team should actively help Theo on fixing and closing issues, not just pay him extra. I assume that Theo, being a CNX's dev, is already paid for his work.

I would like to see you/your team really making commits and fixing issues. This is what the shareholders expect from this worker IMO.

This assumption was already negatived in previous statements. We are a DAC and our only working manpower is what comes through the Workers.. the expectation of free labourers from CNX is not a reasonable assumption.

Negatived? You mean rejected?

Doesn't matter if you guys keep saying CNX shouldn't be expected to work on Graphene "for free", I certainly feel they should as it's in their interest (and I'm even a founding member and stock holder), and I'm pretty sure most people around here also think they should.

Sorry I meant negated... just woke up after only a few hrs sleep :)  Corrected.

In regards to free work.. where exactly should the funds come from then for them to work 'for free' if this is the case. I like to understand how their business model for man-hours should be paid then. What are the more ideal solutions that can work better?
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline svk


This means that your team should actively help Theo on fixing and closing issues, not just pay him extra. I assume that Theo, being a CNX's dev, is already paid for his work.

I would like to see you/your team really making commits and fixing issues. This is what the shareholders expect from this worker IMO.

This assumption was already negatived in previous statements. We are a DAC and our only working manpower is what comes through the Workers.. the expectation of free labourers from CNX is not a reasonable assumption.

Negatived? You mean rejected?

Doesn't matter if you guys keep saying CNX shouldn't be expected to work on Graphene "for free", I certainly feel they should as it's in their interest (and I'm even a founding member and stock holder), and I'm pretty sure most people around here also think they should.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode


This means that your team should actively help Theo on fixing and closing issues, not just pay him extra. I assume that Theo, being a CNX's dev, is already paid for his work.

I would like to see you/your team really making commits and fixing issues. This is what the shareholders expect from this worker IMO.

This assumption was already negated in previous statements. We are a DAC and our only working manpower is what comes through the Workers.. the expectation of free labourers from CNX is not a reasonable assumption.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2016, 02:26:17 pm by BunkerChain Labs »
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+