His website is actually really funny and except for the expired SSL I see nothing wrong with it, it may even be a great reminder of the old days haha. Even if I think he could update his SSL if he wants to work on bitcoin core I don’t think that it is actually a good indicator if he is a good coder or not.
In any case I hope he is added and will bring some fresh ideas to the core development, since I think that is always a good thing.
Topic: Likely new maintainer (Read 235 times)
Pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27604
Click on the github link you gave, click on his personal website, https://russ.yanofsky.org/ that is listed there and the SSL is expired.
Which if you ignore leads to a really old school website that has not been updated in 15+ years.
Which if you ignore leads to a really old school website that has not been updated in 15+ years.
If it means their focus is primarily on Bitcoin and not their personal site, then it's probably not a bad sign.
Besides, seems to be a trend these days that social media has now effectively replaced personal websites. Easier to update, more obvious engagement from others, etc. I'm pretty sure that's normal.
Agreed with 1 point, which was kind of my I made it. I have a lot of crap sites out there. I 100% admit it, a lot are not maintained or even looked at. But are still sitting out there, if you happen to trip across one of them so be it. If something dies on one of them like the letsencrypt renewal, then also so be it.
However, since the link was directly in his github profile I would think that he (or someone) would have noticed it an fixed it, or changed the link.
As Carlton said, more maintainers is better.
-Dave
yeah, ryanofsky seems a good choice, for a variety of reasons. he's been working on the project a long time, and offers thoughtful and insightful dialogue to others, both when reviewing and when his code is the subject of review.
naming no names, but there was disquiet among the "there needs to be a formal process" camp of people, which seemed to be a thinly veiled attempt to criticize the lack of support for (in essence) their choice of candidate for maintainer late last year. The same loose group seems to have noticed that creating an alternative implementation of a bitcoin node is the only meaningful recourse, evidenced by their (unsuccessful thus far) attempt to drum up support from developers to start a new project that would "fix governance problems" in the Bitcoin Core project.
it seems as if the activity around the Bitcoin Core project is gradually getting smaller than it was 2012-2017, although that's just an impression. for sure at least some developers on the project have opined that there's significant work to do, and not enough devs. regardless of whether one agrees with the direction of the project or not, that sounds to me as if they know what the direction is, they just need new talent. (FWIW, every sub-project make sense to me, with the possible exception of the v3 transactions/package relay stuff, which sounds overly complex as solutions go... but I'm undecided as of now)
how the project could possibly be helped with squabbling over meta-process bike-shedding is perhaps not such a mystery... let's just say I'm glad these people are being politely ignored
naming no names, but there was disquiet among the "there needs to be a formal process" camp of people, which seemed to be a thinly veiled attempt to criticize the lack of support for (in essence) their choice of candidate for maintainer late last year. The same loose group seems to have noticed that creating an alternative implementation of a bitcoin node is the only meaningful recourse, evidenced by their (unsuccessful thus far) attempt to drum up support from developers to start a new project that would "fix governance problems" in the Bitcoin Core project.
it seems as if the activity around the Bitcoin Core project is gradually getting smaller than it was 2012-2017, although that's just an impression. for sure at least some developers on the project have opined that there's significant work to do, and not enough devs. regardless of whether one agrees with the direction of the project or not, that sounds to me as if they know what the direction is, they just need new talent. (FWIW, every sub-project make sense to me, with the possible exception of the v3 transactions/package relay stuff, which sounds overly complex as solutions go... but I'm undecided as of now)
how the project could possibly be helped with squabbling over meta-process bike-shedding is perhaps not such a mystery... let's just say I'm glad these people are being politely ignored
Click on the github link you gave, click on his personal website, https://russ.yanofsky.org/ that is listed there and the SSL is expired.
Which if you ignore leads to a really old school website that has not been updated in 15+ years.
Which if you ignore leads to a really old school website that has not been updated in 15+ years.
If it means their focus is primarily on Bitcoin and not their personal site, then it's probably not a bad sign.
Besides, seems to be a trend these days that social media has now effectively replaced personal websites. Easier to update, more obvious engagement from others, etc. I'm pretty sure that's normal.
Bitcoin Core is one of the primary implementation software of the Bitcoin protocols and Russell Yanofsky is now gonna play a new role in Bitcoin Core as maintainer which describes his past achievements and technical expertise I was just going through the ETFBitcoins provided links and DaveF provided links found many things but most interesting one for me was His initial projects.
Dude like really haha he is working on such a project when I was not even born haha, anyway if he has a great past then he obviously deserves a great future too.
Dude like really haha he is working on such a project when I was not even born haha, anyway if he has a great past then he obviously deserves a great future too.
With recent retirement of some notable Bitcoin Core contributor, it's good news. I briefly checked Bitcoin Core page and found he has 538 commits[1] which cover various aspect[2] including refactor which isn't easy thing to do on big software like Bitcoin Core.
[1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/graphs/contributors
[2] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits?author=ryanofsky
[1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/graphs/contributors
[2] https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits?author=ryanofsky
Click on the github link you gave, click on his personal website, https://russ.yanofsky.org/ that is listed there and the SSL is expired.
Which if you ignore leads to a really old school website that has not been updated in 15+ years.
Dave's grumpy old man attitude. And beginning with I have a lot of things out there that are just as bad, if not worse.
BUT come on, clean it up a bit if you want to work on maintaining for code something like core where you are going to be responsible for peoples funds.
Other then that since I have casually been following he seems good. I just never looked at more till now.
-Dave
Which if you ignore leads to a really old school website that has not been updated in 15+ years.
Dave's grumpy old man attitude. And beginning with I have a lot of things out there that are just as bad, if not worse.
BUT come on, clean it up a bit if you want to work on maintaining for code something like core where you are going to be responsible for peoples funds.
Other then that since I have casually been following he seems good. I just never looked at more till now.
-Dave
This discussion happened yesterday in IRC: https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2023-05-04#919305;
Looks like fairly unanimous support for adding Russell Yanofsky as a new maintainer. As achow101 mentioned, a GitHub proposal should appear in the coming days.
Looks like fairly unanimous support for adding Russell Yanofsky as a new maintainer. As achow101 mentioned, a GitHub proposal should appear in the coming days.
Jump to: