►
From YouTube: Ethereum Core Devs Meeting #9 [1/26/2017]
B
A
A
Should
we
set
up
like
a
recurring
meeting
time
we
usually
do
like
a
google
doodle,
but
people
that
asking
if
we
can
just
set
up
like
a
you
know
always
on
the
state
this
time.
So
a
suggestion
that
I
had
was
the
first
and
third
friday
of
every
month
at
1400
UTC,
so
pretty
much
this
time
first
and
third,
friday
of
every
month,
is
there
anybody
who
has
a
better
suggestion
or
anything?
That's
a
deal
breaker
for
that
time.
A
Because
the
last
few
times
fridays
to
be
like
the
least
busy
for
people
but
yeah
I'm,
okay,
with
Thursday's
as
well
just
kind
of
depends
on
what
people
think
and
what
we
might
do
is
there's
going
to
be
some
days
that
you
know,
there's
going
to
be
conflicts
with
a
bunch
of
people
missing
like
Ed
con
and
Paris
coming
up
on
the
fourteenth
februari,
so
we'll
have
to
change
it
but
I'm.
Just
thinking
we
try
I,
just
thinking
we
try.
Fridays
1400
see
how
that
goes.
C
A
G
B
A
A
H
C
E
E
G
E
Think
an
answer
is
in
you
know:
I'm
not
in
a
liberty
to
to
make
a
decision
and
then
I
don't
get
someone
that
can
make
it
efficient
or
you
know,
don't
I
mean
you
know:
we've
got
to
do
something
yeah,
so
if,
if
Gavin
is
that
the
person
that
can
make
a
decision
get
them
on
the
call
here
and
otherwise
you
know,
I
think
this
has
been.
The
third
call,
the
ford
call,
maybe
I
think
we
should
we
should
just
are
they
we
should
do
it.
We
should
implement
them.
A
Sounds
good
so
just
real,
quick
about
the
process
for
these
decisions
and
eat.
So
this
was
actually
the
last
agenda
item,
but
it's
probably
better
that
I
bring
it
up
now.
The
new
AI
p
process
has
a
more
defined
way
of
you
know
getting
through
EEP.
So
there's
going
to
be
just
a
little
bit
more
of
a
formal
method,
we're
still
going
to
be
using.
A
You
know
just
general
consensus
and
meetings
like
this
and
other
things
to
you
know
come
up
with
if
Annie
could
move
forward,
but
things
are
going
to
be
waiting
in
queue
for
months
anymore.
As
long
as
they
have,
you
know
pretty
general
consensus
and
we
can
quickly
get
together
with
those
to
the
main
parties.
A
So
yeah
that
should
fix
things
a
lot,
but
yeah
sounds
like
everybody's
in
agreement
on
that,
pending
any
more
comments
from
parity,
and
we
wouldn't
check
an
encore
des
channel
for
that
on
the
top
left
side,
because
I
think
someone
just
asked
if
there
is
a
chat,
if
you
open
the
shared
document
on
the
top
left,
it's
like
it
looks
like
the
little
document
icon
that
opens
up
an
easier
pad.
So
we
can
just
use
that
and
I'm
taking
notes
and
I'm
going
to
release
those
on
the
github
afterwards.
A
I
K
E
So
I
I
mentioned
it
on
crimes
for,
but
so
we've
been,
I
I'm
not
suggesting
the
week
that
we
do
this
now,
but
maybe
for
the
next
time
we
we
switch
to
discord.
We've
had
some,
you
know,
we've
had
pretty
good
experience
with
a
Stefano
drop
out.
No
weird
I
mean
we
have
some
weird
Croatia,
like
the
ones
who
you
have
right
now,
but
things
seem
to
be
improving
rapidly.
E
A
A
We're
going
to
keep
trying
this
for
the
time
being,
then
I'm
really
doing
those
after
so
I'll.
Just
let
everyone
know
we
kind
of
have
to
go
through
this
way,
but
we're
are
some
options
for
people
to
troubleshoot.
So
well,
that's
happening.
Let's
go
ahead
and
the
next
one
is
also
a
Christian
talking
about
pre-compiled
for
a
lift
at
curved
point
edition
and
a
number
of
other
topics
on
that.
G
So
this
is
basically
about
adding
precompile
for
or
yeah
enables
the
case.
Locks
on
helium
and
I
forget
about
re
organism.
I
had
some
kind
of
research
session
in
December
and
at
first
we
try
to
keep
the
the
precompiled
as
flexible
as
possible,
support
multiple
curves
that
we
can
switch
the
different
curve
with
some
curves
Churchill,
not
to
be
bad,
but
it
looks
like
this
can't
really
be
done.
G
There
are
no
generic
elliptic
curve
edition
or
in
general
and
sicker
population
implementations
because
we
would
meet
so
we
of
course
have
to
assign
gas
costs
to
every
precompile
and
there's
no
way
to
do
that
in
a
real
generic
fashion,
so
I
would
propose
to
concentrate
or
to
implement
precompile
exactly
for
the
elliptic
curve.
You
study
cash
and
a
particular
one
elliptic
yeah
one
MC
curve
on
traditional
precompile,
one
scalar
multiplication
precompile
and
one
pre-compiled
for
the
for
a
pairing
function:
the
ok,
the
pairing
function,
perhaps
I
also
should
say
something
there.
G
So
in
general,
it's
the
quite
complicated
thing
that
maps
a
point
that
takes
two
points
or
two
different
ellipticals
and
map
them
to
a
rather
complicated
finite
field.
And
all
of
these
in
all
of
these,
we
could
potentially
run
into
representation
problems
because
there's
no
really
not
a
unique
way
to
represent
elements
from
the
pet.
G
But
the
good
news
is
that
we
can.
Instead
of
implementing
this
pairing
function,
we
can
it's
precise
us
to
implement
a
pairing
checker
which
basically
just
returns
true
or
false,
depending
on
whether
the
result
is
the
identity
or
not
in
the
target
troop,
and
that
removes
the
need
for
a
complex
set
to
find
the
complex
encoding
of
this
complex
on
a
field.
And
so
what
remains
for
the
specification
is
just
too
yeah
fix
and
encoding
for
these
two
elliptic
curves
for
points
for
these
two
little
code
and
of
course,
yet
your
time,
Gasca
wet.
G
I
We
want
to
make
the
sum
of
the
precompiled
slightly
more
generic.
Well,
one
thing
that
we
could
do
is
we
could
make
the
addition
and
multiplication
via
support
any
curves
that
have
like
any
be
parameter,
so
the
a
parameter
would
be
of
the
curve
would
be
0,
but
the
beep.
What
the
be
could
be
anything
one
reason
why
this
kind
of
slight
increase
in
generic
mrs.nice
is
because
it
also
covers
the
sexy
256k
one
curve
that
we
use
already
for
geeky
recover.
So
what
we
give
for.
I
G
I
A
I
I
I
H
G
J
G
A
N
I
N
I
I
I
I'm
hold
on
so
Java.
The
I
mean
first
of
all,
why
do
I
would
recommend
the
stuff
one
trying
to
see
if
there's
any
pairing
implementations
written
already
in
Java
and
if
there
aren't
then
I
guess
cause
copying
Python
and
if,
if
it
passes
all
the
like
all
the
tests
and
it's
probably
worth
giving
it
a
review.
B
A
D
A
So
yeah
we
can.
We
can
check
that
one
off
so
the
next
thing,
and
this
one
is
going
to
take
a
little
bit
the
agenda
that
I
posted.
If
everyone
could
go
there
during
this
conversation,
there
are
about
five
links
for
the
cips.
That
metallic
is
going
to
be
discussing
he's
going
to
be
talking
about
metropolis,
but
real,
quick
before
we
do
that.
What
is
because
I
know
Martin
will
posted
this.
A
difficulty
bomb
is
about
three
months
away.
Is
that
still
the
case.
I
Well,
it
did
it's
not
so
much
a
bomb,
it's
an
ice
age
right
so
like
the
it
never
explodes
it,
just
kind
of
becomes.
The
word
on
the
blocks
plan
becomes
worse
and
worse
and
the
security
becomes
worse
and
worse
over
time.
So
what
three
months
is
the
words
are
to
become
noticeable
I
think
actually
hold
on.
Let
me
just
get
my
script
out
again
and
I'll.
Just
read
it
out
again.
I
Okay,
so
from
what
I
have
in
exactly
three
months
from
now
so
around
march,
twenty
fifth,
the
Blue
Ox
time-
is
going
to
go
up
to
fifteen
point
two
seconds.
So
that's
about
six
percent
up
then
six
months
from
now
so
like
around
july
25th,
the
blogs
time
will
be
up
to
a
29-point.
Seven
seconds
so
like
between
three
to
six
months
is
where
it
starts
to
kind
of
substantially
manifests
itself.
A
Okay,
cool
so
interesting,
so
I
guess:
does
anyone
have
any
questions
or
concerns
about
that?
We're
going
to
have
a
number
of
core
dev
meetings
in
between
that
time
and
it
sounds
like
we're
coming
along
with
some
of
the
metropolis
planning.
So
if
there's
no
other
concerns
about
that
specifically
of
the
taliking
go
ahead
with
the
Metro
VIPs,
you
were
going
to
discuss.
I
Sure
I
mean
from
these
five
I
think
I'm,
pretty
sure
we
discussed
the
almost
all
of
them
already
so,
like
EIT
86
of
the
abstraction
changes,
so
I
recall
less
discussing
that
several
times
in
previous
meetings
basically
allows
a
new
transaction
type,
that's
kind
of
more.
Basically,
it
has
a
sender
of
0
and
then
it
also
has
a
two
extra.
I
There
were
a
couple
of
versions
of
this,
but,
as
I
recall,
we
get
into
one
version,
but
basically
there's
one
of
the
issues
that
you
start
getting
is
like
what,
if
you
try
to
what?
If
there
is
an
existing
contract
that
calls
create
in
such
a
way
that
it
tries
to
like
create
many,
a
contract
with
the
same
code
many
times,
and
you
don't
want
to
break
existing
stuff
unless
you
absolutely
have
to
so.
I
The
debate
was
between
having
a
very
complicated
scheme
that
check
for
that
it
automatically
tries
to
jump
to
a
different
address
versus
is
just
having
like
a
new,
create
off
code
like
I
call
to
create
pqs
age,
but
well.
You
can
called
create
whatever
and
I
recall
the
opinion
being
more
toward
creating
a
new
off
code,
because
that's
just
like
cleaner.
I
I
G
I
G
I
Right
exactly
such
a
that's,
what
I
was
getting
at
that?
Basically,
if
you
have
a
create
free,
compile
without
without
having
a
create
opcodes,
then
you
have
a
pre-compiled.
I
cannot
even
see
erratically,
be
implemented
in
vm
code
in
this
is
a
sort
of
fundamentally
new
kind
of
complexity,
so
that
was
the
kind
of
best
argument
to
get
extra
in
favor
of
just
making
it
an
opcode
for
the
time
being,
but.
A
I
I
A
A
F
A
I
I
A
I
O
A
A
A
H
I
I
The
second
and
there
will
also
be
like
client-side,
minor
logic
that
says
what
in
what
was
that,
if
that
would
like
provide
some
extra
conditions
for
accepting
transactions
like
that,
but
that's
not
something
we
need
to
have
consensus
on.
So
that's
like
not
really
any
IP,
then
the
second
part
of
ipv6
is
this
rule
change
for
how
to
generate
addresses
for
contract
and
96.
I
We're
sorry
into
seems
like
the
pattern.
There
are
a
few
pass
with
a
few
different
trade-offs
and
it
seems,
like
the
one
people
are
most
happy
with
its
adding.
In
this
say,
a
kind
of
new
creed
go
to
follow
the
new
rules
and
then
bring
out
how
to
deprecate
you
with
one
safely
and
then
the
VIP
98,
basically
removers
intermediate
state
routes,
which
has
a
pro.
I
It
does
have
a
couple
of
cons,
and
we
decided
through
that,
like
myself
and
Jeff
anywhere
else
and
interested,
will
take
it
offline
and
discuss
at
some
point
to
figure
out.
It's
actually
worth
it,
then
EIT
e101,
just
to
skip
ahead
a
bit
is
basically
big
in
conversation
and
now
I'm,
I
personally
and
I
originally
proposed
the
same.
The
original
rationale
basically
was
that
there's
at
least
a
few
people
that
need
to
use
our
essay
and
we
might
as
well
make
a
generic
and
like
support
various
kinds
of
big
interface
crypto.
I
My
current
position
is
that,
if
we're
doing
this
I
think
modular
exponentiation
itself
should
be
enough.
So,
basically,
don't
bother
with
multiplication
and
don't
bother
with
addition,
my
reasoning,
basically
being
that
addition
is
probably
quick
and
like
over
those
three
exponentiation
is
the
only
one
where
you
actually
really
might
need
the
optimization.
There's
addition,
you
can
just
do
fairly
easily
any
vm
multiplication.
You
can
do
in
EDM,
it's
quadratic,
but
like
it's
still,
not
too
bad,
or
if
you
want,
you
can
basically
do
look.
You
can
convert
a
multiplication
into
two
modular.
I
I
So
basically,
the
question
is
like
whether
or
not
to
add
this
I'm,
so
the
mean
users
would
be
you,
I
mean
what
Oracle
ice
is
one
example
and
there's
a
few
others,
like
general,
there's
just
a
lot
of
least
some
cases
where
people
want
to
exert
I
existing
like
cryptography
that
comes
from
outside.
If
you're
a
man
die,
cryptography
happens
to
be
either
RSA
or
something
big
something
big
integer
based,
then
100.
I
So
this
was
in
response
to
a
young
loner
ability
to
score
a
bug
report
made
by
Sergio
erener
working,
pointed
out
an
incentive
for
that
basically
incur
encourages
mine,
large
mining,
folsom,
I
uncles,
and
the
solution
is
that,
instead
of
targeting
a
fiction
blocks
time,
we
would
soar,
get
a
fix
or
instead
of
targeting
a
fixed
time
between
block
number
increments.
We
would
target
a
fixed
time
between
blocks,
including
uncle's
is
there's
like
a
flight
formula
change.
I
It's
like
one
line
of
code
that
will
give
us
that
then
EIT,
140
and
I
threw
it
in
because
I
feel
like
we
haven't,
discussed
it
enough.
But
it's
interesting,
which
is
a
Nikolai's
idea
of
basically
a
throw-up
code
that
doesn't
set
that
that
doesn't
just
burn
all
of
the
gas.
That's
a
given
given
to
your
self
goal.
I
E
G
E
G
One
thing
I'm
so
that
might
be
dangerous
with
this-
is
that
currently
we
can
do
some
kind
of
sloppy
GAAP
accounting
when
we
hit
the
out
of
gas
and
I
mean
something.
This
is
not
really
enough
gas,
so
it's
in
them
right
some
specific
opcode,
so
it
might
not
be
too
too
difficulty
to
that,
and
so
I
admit,
I
didn't
reach
the
health
record.
That
proposal
does.
It
include
some
kind
of
error
code.
You
can
also
supply.
I
I
A
I
I
think,
let
me
think
I
remember
talking
about
serenity
in
phases.
I
mean
I,
remember,
metropolis,
being
I
know
so
the
time
when
I
broke,
that
I
was
proposing
breaking
up
metropolis
into
part
1
and
part
2
was
when
we
thought
that
we
would
do
a
dow
40
and
like
if
we're
going
to
do
or
sorry
when
we
were
debate,
is
first
discussing
the
idea
of
method.
L4K,
yes,
for
to
fix
the
GOS
issues
and
I
brought
up
the
idea
of
well
hey.
I
I
Who
don't
that
into
metropolis
or
will
know
that
was
you
know?
Some
of
them
are
mine,
but
like
some
of
them
aren't
so
like
140
is
from
Nikolai,
but
look
a
lot
of
like
most
of
them
are
things
that
we
had
already
discussed
and
that
I
recall
us
kind
of
tentatively
already
agreeing
or
okay
for
metropolis.
G
I
A
That's
a
good
idea.
Christian
of
is
there
a
way
to
maybe
do
point
values
or
something
relative
to
say
the
difficulty
of
each
AIP
that
metallics
listed
out
and
then
the
58
that
you
just
mentioned.
Is
that
something
that
should
be
done
on
this
call
or
would
be
very
quick
to
say
you
know,
for
each
client,
you
know
how
faster
to
be
for
you
to
do
this
to
kind
of
get
an
idea.
A
I
I
A
Exactly
so
it
ever
maybe
even
a
combination,
so
yeah
a
Christian
to
answer
your
question
since
we're
going
to
start
having
these
every
two
weeks.
That
should
be
something
especially
for
the
next
agenda
to
say
you
know
everyone.
You
know
between
now
and
the
next
meeting
see
if
any
of
these
are
going
to
be
too
difficult
to
get
done,
and
you
know
X
amount
of
time
so
actually
speaking
of
time,
just
because
this
is
something
we
can
probably
you
know
decide
pretty
much
today.
E
E
A
A
Just
blame
you
either
way
so
I
was
saying,
is
I
think
that
if
we
come
up
between
now
and
then
with
like
a
page
that
just
says
eip,
you
know
time
to
implement
time
to
test
estimate
and
then
give
ourselves
a
ton
of
time
on
that
we
can
safely
create
a
list
of
VIPs.
We
definitely
want
to
get
to
before
metropolis
and
then
sometimes
like,
maybe
one
or
two
stretch
goals.
As
far
as.
E
E
A
L
A
A
A
A
L
A
That
might
be
an
offline
thing,
but
yeah,
that's
that's
a
good!
That's
a
good
strategy
and
it
looks
like
yeah.
It's
a
pretty
it's
an
active
eip
thread.
So
if
we
could
just
recommend
everybody
to
go
to
that
eip
thread
and
make
comments
on
it,
I
think
that
might
move
it
along
a
little
bit
and
it
looks
like
Martin
still
having
connection
problems
Martin.
Can
you
hear
us
now.
A
E
C
L
H
C
E
Yeah
I'm,
so
I
was
looking
at
a
deer
today
and
I
had
a
few
suggestions
that
I
think
we
should
be
discussing
over
I.
Don't
want
to
discuss
them
out.
Cuz
it's
taking
up
too
much
time.
I
think
we
should
move
on
to
two
other
things
can
definitely
be
done
offline
on
all
cour
des
channel.
It's
just
mainly
adding
some
extra
fields.
That
might
be
helpful
and
that's
all
so
we
can
discuss
that
outline
I,
definitely
think
it's
a
good
idea
and
I
think
we
should
be
moving
forward
with
it.
A
E
A
G
Even
restricts
the
Kali
to
read
from
the
stage
which
would
make
the
it
a
yeah
a
pure
function,
I
mean
in
general,
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
benefits
of
making
call
a
bit
more
parametric
to
restrict
what
colonies
can
do,
but
we
have
to
find
a
solution
so
that
we
don't
need
any
opcode
for
every
single
thing.
So
perhaps
you
could
also
combine
delegate
call
and
all
these
these
combinations
there.
I
G
I
J
G
I
G
G
J
J
A
G
Solidity
would
like
to
change
its
behavior
for
reversion,
so
the
the
thing
is,
we
want
to
distinguish
explicit,
throw
from
things
like
arithmetic,
overflow
or
array
out
of
bounds
access,
and
for
one
of
them
we
want
to
keep
the
jump
to
invalid
jump
test
and
for
the
other
we
want
to
use
an
invalid
opcode,
and
the
question
is
just:
is
it
safe
to
assume
that
we
don't
break
any
compatibility
by
assuming
that
this?
Of
course,
0
xes
will
always
be
invalid?
In.
I
A
K
A
A
A
G
A
A
E
E
Present
clear
image,
not
clear
me
either,
because
if
so
I
mean
you
know,
we
could
quickly
discover
the
implementation
detail
so
static.
All
my
don't
think
we
need
to
learn
if
it's
necessarily
to
and
that
our
meeting
to
just
discuss
this
topic.
We
can
have
your
calling
conventions
and
stuff
like
that
on
another
call.
What
I
think
it
is
important
to
discuss
that
a
call
okay.
E
E
E
O
G
I
I
The
thing
that
the
thing
that
I
would
prefer
is
I
have
an
opcode
that
I
already
use,
and
some
of
them
in
my
task
for
VOCs,
which
is
called
call
black
box,
which,
just
like
directly,
takes
a
piece
of
code
and
a
piece
of
data
as
an
argument
and
so
basically
to
bite
slices
but
I
stick
there
might
be
an
EIP
for
for
it
somewhere
in
it.
Yeah
I.
Remember,
am
yeah.
G
I
G
I
A
L
A
Okay,
so
let's
get
some
formal
eip
is
on
that
and
again
I'm
going
to
send
everybody
really
soon.
What
the
new
AIP
template
is
it's
very
similar
to
the
old
one,
though
so
as
long
as
you
all
just
kind
of
follow
that
it'll
be
good
enough.
Okay
think
there
are
dias,
are
some
aips
on
that,
but
just
yeah
kind
of
digging
them
up
and
telling
them
for
the
like
may
be
in
the
meeting
notes
or
something
so
that
I
can
reference.
This
might
be
great,
so.
I
I
A
The
new
eip
processes-
it's
actually
not
new,
it's
actually
just
enforcing
kind
of
how
it
currently
is
with
a
few
updates.
The
templates
similar
it's
going
to
the
template
for
the
eip
is
similar.
It's
going
to
have
a
section
for
like
plain
text
like
when
I
say
plain:
tex
I
mean
like
human
readable.
What
the
CIP
is
about,
so
someone
just
like
with
not
as
much
technical
or
specific
athyrium
technical
knowledge
can
know
what
the
impact
of
it
is,
or
the
proposed
impact.
A
Additionally,
just
a
few
more
clarifications
in
there
to
avoid
issues
like
we
had
in
the
last
hard
fork,
with
different
implementations,
implementing
at
different
ways
and
then
also
moving
it
to
PRS
helps
with
tracking
the
changes.
So,
for
instance,
there's
been
a
few
II
IPS,
where
changes
were
discussed
in
different
channels
like
skype
and
then
not
updated
on
the
main
eip.
So
then
there
was
some
miscommunication
there,
so
it's
pretty
much
just
to
get
clarity
of
communication
and
to
help
streamline
the
process.
A
So
the
process
is
when
you
have
an
idea,
put
it
in
an
issue
and
you
can
discuss
it
in
the
issue.
Talk
about
whatever
you
want,
it
can
be
as
simple
as
one
line
it
can
be
as
complex
as
a
whole
template
like
PR
style
template
and
then,
when
you
want
to
actually
move
your
VIP
into
like
a
draft
status,
make
a
PR
for
it
now
github
allows
you
to
make
PRS
within
the
repo,
so
you
don't
even
have
to
I.
A
Don't
even
think
you
have
to
clone
the
whole
repo
anymore,
but
a
lot
of
people
will
be
more
comfortable
doing
that
and
then
there's
just
a
it's
pretty
much
just
kind
of
how
it
was
before
I
think
we
took
out
a
few
of
the.
We
took
out
a
few
of
the
labels
so
instead
of
like
approved
and
accepted,
there's
just
accepted
now,
I'm
going
to
post
the
link
to
all
of
the
change
discussion
and
at
the
very
top
there
is
all
of
the.
A
A
Yeah
we
changed
it
to
four
subtypes,
so
we've
been
having
a
lot
of
ercs
come
through
like
the
token
standard
so
and
the
ens
standards,
so
we're
going
to
have
those
version
now.
So
whenever
there's
any
IP,
a
subcategory
of
that
can
be
an
erc
and
you
would
have
liked
token
standard
version
1
and
then,
once
consensus
has
been
met,
you
can
go
ahead
and
just
kind
of
approve
that,
as
you
know,
an
approved
eip,
/
erc
and
then,
when
you
want
to
update
that,
you
would
make
a
version.
Two
there's
also
yeah.
A
A
Perfect
and
then
the
last,
the
second
to
last
one
difficulty
bomb
and
we
already
discussed
that
so
yeah
and
then
yep
I
just
went
over
the
new,
the
IP
process.
So
if
anyone
has
comments
on
the
eip
process,
it's
not
final,
a
core
group
of
people
who
have
been
active
and
wanting
to
change
it
and
you
know,
help
out
what
the
changes
have
been
discussing
it,
but
anyone
can
jump
in
additionally,
the
list
of
editors
it
currently
stands
is.
Let
me
pull
them
up,
because
this
is
also
kind
of
an
important
thing
right
now.
A
F
I
E
A
L
A
C
J
E
All
I,
don't
think,
is
really
necessary
to
talk
about
that.
Now
there
is
a
swarm
room
on
guitar
I'm
feel
free
to
ask
those
questions
over
there
I.
To
be
honest,
I
dunno's
dig
back
photos.
I
know
its
operating
on
the
on
the
touchpad
and
if
semi-functional
but
yeah
go
ahead
and
jump
into
the
swarm
get
a
room.
It's
public.
Yes,.
A
C
I
To
be
coded,
I
think
it
sounds
like
the
very
near
term
plan
is
like,
after
this
call
for
developers
to
a
kind
start
implementing
these,
at
least
the
EITS,
that
we
have
a
very
clear
consensus
on
and
to
continue
kind
of
discussion
discussing
amongst
each
other
to
continue
to
like,
like
a
research
too
for
implementing
pairings
and
hopefully
we'll
keep
coordinating
in
within
the
next
two
one
or
two
weeks
or
so.
We'll
have
a
much
better
idea
of
kind
of
what
the
priority
list
is.
Yeah.
A
So
I
just
made
an
issue
and
the
project
management
repository
so
I'll
fill
in
kind
of
the
info
at
the
top
of
their.
The
main
goals
of
that
is
going
to
be
deciding.
Definitely
what
is
required
for
the
next
hard
fork,
rough
timeline
to
then
finalize
timelines,
hopefully
by
next
all
core
dev
meeting
or
as
soon
as
possible
and
come
up
with
time
estimates
for
the
how
long
a
IPS
can
take
to
implement
and
how
long
they
would
take
to
test
on
a
per
client
basis.
So
I
can
round
up
everybody
for
that.
A
B
O
I
I
mean
perfect
start
to
see
what
you
can
implement,
then
I
would
even
say
as
soon
as
possible.
Once
we
get
once
we
get
kind
of
informal
consensus
than
just
start
going
ahead
and
implementing
as
I
think
like,
given
that
we
do
have
that.
So
we
do
have
a
deadline,
I
think
trying
to
kind
of
pipeline
things
and
just
getting
to
work
on
the
first
half,
but
even
what
even
while
getting
to
in
consensus
on
the
second
half
would
be
quite
sensible.
O
G
A
A
More
important
to
some
people
than
others,
we
can
definitely
check.
Oh
you
know
what
before
we
go,
who
cares
if
this
is
this
audio
is
presented
to
the
public?
Is
that
something
that
anyone
has
a
problem
with
I'm
not
doing
it
yet,
but
just
I'm
thinking
about
that
as
a
way
for
people
to
more
clearly
go
back
and
see
what's
going
on
no.