Retention of rank 1 - tdimitrov

evidence/tdimitrov/0002-rank1-retention-dec2024.md

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+# Evidence-0002: Retention at/Promotion to Rank 1
+
+|                 |                                                                                             |
+| --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Report Date** | Date of submission (2024/11/28)                                                             |
+| **Submitted by**| Tsvetomir Dimitrov                                                                        |
+
+
+## Member details
+
+- Matrix username: @tsvetomir:parity.io
+- Polkadot address: 1QhVP5qzR2LfXqP77N1JcuwHoY7NH8JVRNFm1hSooE9d4pR
+- Current rank: 1
+- Date of initial induction: 2023/10/11
+- Date of last report: 2024/08/28
+- Area(s) of Expertise/Interest: Disputes, Agile Coretime
+
+
+## Reporting period
+
+- Start date: 2024/08/28
+- End date: 2024/11/28
+
+
+## Evidence
+
+During this reporting period I've finished my work on Agile Cortime migration testing on Polkadot.
+Unfortunately the chopsticks migration test which I wrote gave a false positive result (due to [this
+issue](https://github.com/AcalaNetwork/chopsticks/issues/823)) and we had to release another
+migration which fixes the Agile Coretime state. The migration was mainly done by @donal and
+@eskimor. I've contributed with testing and reviews. [Link to the
+PR](https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/runtimes/pull/458).
+
+Next I worked on an implementation of collation fetching fairness for Agile Coretime. It is part of
+[polkadot-sdk #1797](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/1797). The problem turned out
+to be more complicated than I estimated initially which lead to a few iterations of the
+implementation. I made some wrong assumptions and went for a simple implementation which was not
+covering all cases. After figuring this out I did a rework which was more complex but covered all
+the edge cases. [Link to the PR](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/4880). At the time
+I am writing this evidence the PR is still not merged but it is pending a final code review and
+hopefully will be merged when the referenda is open for voting.
+
+I am also working on the async backing parameters removal
+([issue](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/5079)). I did some preparations in the
+backing subsystem by removing the fallback code handling the absence of prospective parachains
+subsystem. [Link to the PR](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/6215).
+
+During the reporting period I did small fixes for flaky zombienet tests which were breaking the CI
+pipeline. Link to [PR1](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/6268) and
+[PR2](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/6236).
+
+## Voting record
+*Provide your voting record in relation to required thresholds for your rank.*
+
+|  Ranks | Activity thresholds | Agreement thresholds | Member's voting activities | Comments |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+|I  |90%   |N/A   | I have voted on 0 out of 0 referenda in which I was eligible to vote (i.e 100 % voting activity). Out of 0 referenda in which members of higher ranks were in complete agreement, I have voted in line with the consensus 0 times (i.e 100 % voting agreement). | There were no referendas I could participate in during the reporting period |
+|II |80%   |N/A   |   |  |
+|III|70%   |100%  |   |  |
+|IV |60%   |90%   |   |  |
+|V  |50%   |80%   |   |  |
+|VI |40%   |70%   |   |  |
+
+
+## Misc
+
+- [ ] Question(s):
+
+- [ ] Concern(s):
+
+- [ ] Comment(s):
+