Initiative, release SourceCred beta.1 #54
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
but it's missing ipld
Summary: Following the newly updated instructions in the README. Test Plan: Running `python3 -m http.server` at the root of this repository and then following the test plan in sourcecred/sourcecred#1305 confirms that the fix for sourcecred/sourcecred#1304 is correctly integrated.
I've taken out the other projects (ipld, libp2p, filecoin-project) and am just focusing on SourceCred's own cred for now. There are three subprojects: - SourceCred github - SourceCred discourse - SourceCred combined I've added an updater script and a bit more info in the README. Test plan: Local inspection via running a simple http server.
Almost the same as before, but I renamed the combined project "@sourcecred" so as to not break links
Mostly trying to move some cred away from GitHub comment based activity, for reasons discussed in [discourse][1], and reduce the tendency of highly-commented-upon PRs to skyrocket in score. I also moved the default user weights to 0, since they don't actually do anything. Test plan: Inspected the cred, it seems "ok". [1]: https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/preliminary-credsperiment-cred/219/4
A bit redundant as there's no corresponding Discourse account, but I'm thinking for payouts I will filter to only compute for SourceCred identities, so this is convenient.
It's kind of hacky, but should work.
Also update docs and save those scores.
Remove identity resolution for vsoch, no longer needed.
Scores are as computed [in the Observable notebook][1]. The score JSON was downloaded using the "Save Distribution History" button just above the "Full Data" sheet. Test plan: Verify that the hash of this file matches the expected hash in the notebook: ``` $ sha256sum distributionHistory.json 3f75966fdf0e01737952573ef290cebb22298e026ff9697d26e29c20e7bcfd8e ``` [1]: https://observablehq.com/@decentralion/credsperiment-week-1
Generated by running `./update.sh`.
Scores are as computed [in the Observable notebook][1]. The score JSON was downloaded using the "Save Distribution History" button just above the "Full Data" sheet. Test plan: Verify that the hash of this file matches the expected hash in the notebook: ``` $ sha256sum distributionHistory.json bfee2286b361380d01099a01c42c333c302a30a0e0903cdebe368b4c8b53f036 ``` [1]: https://observablehq.com/@decentralion/sourcecred-credsperiment-week-2
* Include payouts repo in github.json * Include payouts repo in combined.json
Scores are as computed [in the Observable notebook][1]. The score JSON was downloaded using the "Save Distribution History" button just above the "Full Data" sheet. Test plan: Verify that the hash of this file matches the expected hash in the notebook: ``` $ sha256sum distributionHistory.json 87bb124576b9a4554e07c0ec8da7e92c7230723ada9f96cc29b9ae8f27c3ee19 ``` [1]: https://observablehq.com/@decentralion/sourcecred-credsperiment-week-3
Matches expected hash: 9c3c8acf17a1e8dc0e0c652a6a2f1a884ec5ea827ad43205dcf3fb5415b960bf
I defined a simple format for the transfers, which just gives the basic necessary info (who, how much, when) along with arbitrary references. I linked to the open collective payout and the discourse payout request in the references. No code yet consumes this information.
The work that goes into this repository should count too. :) Test plan: Run the update script, verify that it loads without issue.
This is a small experiment in having something like [Cred Bounties][1] before we've actually implemented the [Initiatives Plugin][2]. Basically, we're giving a higher weight to a few initiatives: - Produce the SourceCred Podcast: Shipped the podcast! - Discourse Reference Detection: Recently completed. - Champions & Heroes: An exciting contribution. :) - Initiatives Plugin: Nice progress so far. The weight choices are moderate, so it doesn't have a _huge_ effect on cred--we'll hold off on big effects for after the initiatives plugin and cred bounties both land. But this is a nice way to recognize some exciting progress so far. [1]: https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/enable-cred-bounties/257 [2]: https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/write-the-initiatives-plugin/269
As calculated [here]. Shasum matches: ``` ❯ sha256sum distributionHistory.json 5a0e5c16e67f53f82981f304a4ad85e2437b08491b88c5cd010575a516d6f5da ``` [here]: https://observablehq.com/@decentralion/credsperiment-week-5
As computed here: https://observablehq.com/@decentralion/credsperiment-week-6 Expected distributionHistory hash: 9186964bd1fb233e7c929ad7b397201940b5a1a434a0075c14f0bf8d2f5b49fc
* Record a transfer from s-ben to protocol Needs review/ack by @s_ben * Update references for the transfer
As the other projects served more as an example and were out of date.
Using the anonymous API, an apiUsername is no longer needed.
Generated via running ./update.sh
The repository itself was renamed. See sourcecred/github-workflow-examples#42
This updates the project file mainly. Which means we now require the environment variable `SOURCECRED_INITIATIVES_DIRECTORY` is set and a valid directory. To make sure of this an empty directory is added, and the environment variable is exported.
* Preview: Add a first batch of initiatives to the project ## This is a first iteration Rather than letting this stall for too long, let's improve on this with follow ups. Have a look at #29 for info on how to go from here. This is a first iteration, as it's in need of another weighting round. Still missing from this, but identified at the team call: - CredCon: video interviews (need a user account for zak) - CredCon: CredRank prototype (have not decided fibonacci weight) - CredCon: Discord prototype (have not decided fibonacci weight) - Evan's explainer (have not decided fibonacci weight) Also great improvements to make from here: - Adding contributions and linking that to contributors (see #30) Good but not as critical: - Making the timestamps more accurate ## Fibonacci to absolute weights: 100x first, 200x later The 200x multiplier seems in the right ballpark, however we want to avoid champions see Cred "dilute" because we'll add more contributions. Start with 100x now, and move to 200x as we have a more complete coverage. Tracking this in issue #31. ## Other assumptions made ### Dependency structure For the activities as part of CredCon (like hackathon, party, talks), I found they had very similar dependencies on logistical initiatives and CredCon itself. I've generalized this by depending on CredCon, rather than directly depending on logistics. Example: CredCon party, depends on CredCon, depends on car+food+lodging This will make the life of historians easier too, as adding more logicstics (maybe invites or scheduling) would only need to be set as a CredCon dependency, rather than for all activities as well. ### Example references / contributions For the main CredCon initiative, I've added several clearly related forum topics. These are both as an example, and to make sure this part of the graph is not exclusively connected through identities. ### Completion status Other than both Partner initiatives, the CredCon initiatives are set as completed. ## Technical aspects to validate The main point which needs careful manual validation, is to inspect the graph. For example using the "legacy explorer" to confirm the initiative nodes are added and have edges to *all* the URLs added. That means: - Champions: Identities / GitHub users / Discourse users. - References / Contributions: Forum topics (in CredCon). - Dependencies between Initiatives. Note: it's expected for links to an initiative to give a 404 not found, until the PR is merged to master. However they should be listed in the explorer.
Attempt to fix sourcecred/sourcecred#1761. Paired with @Beanow
A transfer of 6k grain. Review plan: Approval by @s_ben (to confirm receipt of payment) and from @Beanow (to confirm that the format is correct).
nb. I manually ensured that docs/CNAME remained untouched.
Now that we've verified that the CNAME fix from #46 works, let's canonicalize it in the update script so that we won't need to maintain it by hand. I ran update.sh and committed the CNAME file generated inside docs, its the same modulo trailing newlines. Test plan: Run update.sh, and verify that the CNAME file is no longer removed or modified.
Beanow
commented
May 1, 2020
Comment on lines
+14
to
+26
| { "title": "Placeholder: Create a scaffolding for Docs" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Create the Initiatives plugin" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Create the Discord plugin" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Write the initial Intro section of the Docs" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Write the initial Concepts section of the Docs" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Create the Grain ledger" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Write the initial Guides section of the Docs" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Create visual language for beta Docs" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Quality of Life for instance maintainers initiative" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Create a Grain UI" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Write the initial Setup and Usage section of the Docs" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Create a data format to answer Cred questions with" }, | ||
| { "title": "Placeholder: Beta.1 polish week initiative" } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pretty much each of these seem to be best described as an Initiative on their own.
The only odd one out here may be the "Beta.1 polish week initiative". As these polish steps seem more like a contribution scale than Initiatives to me. The combination of which might make sense as a polish for beta.1 Initiative?
Comment on lines
+31
to
+39
| { | ||
| "title": "[SourceCred beta.1](https://roamresearch.com/#/app/SourceCred/page/MJtfaaIhK) roam notes", | ||
| "contributors": [ | ||
| "https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/decentralion", | ||
| "https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/lb", | ||
| "https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/Beanow" | ||
| ], | ||
| "weight": null | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This pattern really drives home the roam shortcomings for me and worries me a fair bit.
With no version control, self-reported authors and no automation. The roam notes aren't going to be easy to flow Cred to for the mid term. Making a big adoption push for it I think may deteriorate our Cred quality substantially.
You could say that the self-reporting without version control aspect makes it a Trust level 3 exclusive platform, even if we created a plugin. And the overhead of manually tracking this while there isn't a plugin is practically guaranteed to miss contributions.
Reminding me of @s-ben's earlier comment on this, we may want to be a bit more cautious in our fast migration of all the things into roam.
Comment on lines
+40
to
+48
| { | ||
| "title": "Discord calls planning beta.1's roadmap", | ||
| "contributors": [ | ||
| "https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/decentralion", | ||
| "https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/lb", | ||
| "https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/Beanow" | ||
| ], | ||
| "weight": null | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm certain I'm missing more contributions to create the beta.1 milestone here.
Much appreciated if you could point out some that come to mind!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Relates to Cred issue #42
Taking first steps to draft this, adding some thoughts on it inline.
cc @decentralion, @LexBirdie as contributors affected so far