📅 Original date posted:2013-12-08
📝 Original message:On Sunday, December 08, 2013 9:16:09 PM Saïvann Carignan wrote:
> > 1) Who pays for it? Most obvious answer: Foundation. However there's
> > currently a fairly clear line between the foundation website and the
> > bitcoin.org <http://bitcoin.org>; website. I personally am fine with the
> > bitcoin foundation funding the website, it's a lot closer to the bitcoin
> > community than github. But some people might care. So next step would be
> > to contact the Foundation board and see if they're willing to fund it.
>
> Actually I might find way to fund it. But I needed to have ACK &
> comments from developers before anything.
>
> ...
> > 4) Who admins it?
>
> Obviously, I thought it would be important that the server is owned by
> someone who can be trusted, with ssh access for all core developers.
>
> > 5) Who controls DNS for it?
>
> I'm not sure we'll get any change on this level. I have no idea if the
> domain is in good hands, except for the fact that nothing bad happened
> thus far. If anything, moving it to core developers (as intended when
> the domain was registered) would make more sense IMO. But again, is it
> possible, I don't know.
I don't think "core developers" should be directly in control here any more
than the Foundation should. Developers are good for development, not
necessarily web or server admin tasks. Only those directly involved in the
needed roles should have access IMO.
Luke
Luke-Jr [ARCHIVE] /
npub1dt…u7wrs
2023-06-07 17:10:30
in reply to nevent1q…klnz
Author Public Key
npub1dtr22xd42nv07un2xq0rmtkqkjylgsmexau0anxxafa9xmmn2ncshu7wrsPublished at
2023-06-07 17:10:30Event JSON
{
"id": "765e15eaf57633a9eb8190f39166f95efdc61b12465d728a2ac6b860518d6e29",
"pubkey": "6ac6a519b554d8ff726a301e3daec0b489f443793778feccc6ea7a536f7354f1",
"created_at": 1686150630,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"d517aa463a22abef5f03468f652eeefb44676da99926537d88111078c3e0468b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"bc59512846d051a0f31578d8970cb33649819d12e6e8aeaaa864b6008dad0145",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"d7c806207c21ecfdee654c5001e8ae79bfdbec5fc68daf80b4eeedae04294ee2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-12-08\n📝 Original message:On Sunday, December 08, 2013 9:16:09 PM Saïvann Carignan wrote:\n\u003e \u003e 1) Who pays for it? Most obvious answer: Foundation. However there's\n\u003e \u003e currently a fairly clear line between the foundation website and the\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin.org \u003chttp://bitcoin.org\u003e website. I personally am fine with the\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin foundation funding the website, it's a lot closer to the bitcoin\n\u003e \u003e community than github. But some people might care. So next step would be\n\u003e \u003e to contact the Foundation board and see if they're willing to fund it.\n\u003e \n\u003e Actually I might find way to fund it. But I needed to have ACK \u0026\n\u003e comments from developers before anything.\n\u003e \n\u003e ...\n\u003e \u003e 4) Who admins it?\n\u003e \n\u003e Obviously, I thought it would be important that the server is owned by\n\u003e someone who can be trusted, with ssh access for all core developers.\n\u003e \n\u003e \u003e 5) Who controls DNS for it?\n\u003e \n\u003e I'm not sure we'll get any change on this level. I have no idea if the\n\u003e domain is in good hands, except for the fact that nothing bad happened\n\u003e thus far. If anything, moving it to core developers (as intended when\n\u003e the domain was registered) would make more sense IMO. But again, is it\n\u003e possible, I don't know.\n\nI don't think \"core developers\" should be directly in control here any more \nthan the Foundation should. Developers are good for development, not \nnecessarily web or server admin tasks. Only those directly involved in the \nneeded roles should have access IMO.\n\nLuke",
"sig": "9517eed646ce6efa66df94272b49abd1bce03c3348846ae5e32685d9e65bddc645a60b19298c36a2429ff9733bca9e9497a09a0377ff6807ee9b210fa1d8a001"
}