Workgroup lifecycle

Workgroup lifecycle

Original Postby ariard

Posted on: February 26, 2024 02:38 UTC

The email addresses concerns regarding the private working group's handling of certain issues within the Bitcoin project, specifically pointing out a failure in the design process as evidenced by the outcomes documented in a GitHub issue (GitHub Issue #29319).

It highlights that some mechanisms proposed or implemented, such as the v3 policy and sibling evictions for CPFP (Child Pays for Parent) carve-out, are either ineffective or completely unnecessary. This critique raises questions about the efficacy of the decision-making processes within these private groups.

Furthermore, the email touches on the broader implications of private communication channels among developers from different entities working on Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) like Bitcoin. It suggests that such practices could potentially undermine the principles of open development inherent to FOSS projects, which are typically licensed under frameworks like MIT or Apache 2. These licenses presuppose a level of openness and public domain status for the ideas and designs involved, which private communications could jeopardize.

Additionally, the message advises those involved in private communications about FOSS projects to seek legal counsel. This is to ensure that their practices do not inadvertently affect their responsibilities or lead to liabilities concerning future software defects. The concern here is that private discussions might not only influence the quality and direction of the software development but also have legal repercussions for the developers involved, particularly in the context of software defects and the transparency expected in the development of FOSS projects.