tdimitrov: Retain at rank I

evidence/tdimitrov/0001-rank1-retention-aug2024.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+# Evidence-0000: Retention at/Promotion to Rank 1
+
+|                 |                                                                                             |
+| --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Report Date** | Date of submission (2024/08/28)                                                             |
+| **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: NA
+- Area(s) of Expertise/Interest: Disputes, Agile Coretime
+
+
+## Reporting period
+
+- Start date: 2024/05/26
+- End date: 2024/08/28
+
+## Evidence
+
+During the last three months I was involved with validator disabling strategy implementation and
+Agile Coretime testing.
+
+For validator disabling I was responsible for implementing a generic disabling strategy interface in
+the staking pallet and also implementing a concrete disabling strategy used in Polkadot. PR with the
+changes: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/2226. It's important to note that the
+disabling strategy as a whole was a team effort. I was responsible just for the runtime
+implementation part.
+
+I joined late to the Agile Coretime efforts and contributed mainly with testing and bug fixes. My
+contributions:
+ - Fix for multiple parachains sharing a single core. When two parachains were set to share a core
+   they were 'skipping slots'. The issue was that not all subsystems were using the claim queue to
+   check what's scheduled in the future. The PR is co-authored by @alindima.
+   PR: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/4724
+ - Fix in the runtime migration transferring legacy parachains leases to Coretime chain. There were
+   two issues with the runtime migration. (1) parachains without a legacy lease in the current
+   period but with a legacy lease in the future were not trasnferred to the Coretime chain and (2)
+   time slice calculation formula was wrong.
+   PRs: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/5380 and
+   https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/runtimes/pull/426
+ - The previous issues was discovered with a chopsticks test performing the runtime upgrade and
+   verifying the state after the migration. The code for the test is in this
+   repo: https://github.com/tdimitrov/polkadot-coretime-launch-test
+ - Add Agile Coretime to Polkadot. I've picked up a draft PR by @eskimor enabling Agile Coretime on
+   Polkadot and ported it ontop of the latest release and finished the necessary configurations.
+   PR: https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/runtimes/pull/401
+
+Besides code contributions I am also an active code reviewer.
+My reviews: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pulls?q=is%3Apr+reviewed-by%3Atdimitrov+
+
+
+
+## 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 2 referenda in which I was eligible to vote (i.e 0 % voting activity). Out of 2 referenda in which members of higher ranks were in complete agreement, I have voted in line with the consensus 0 times (i.e 0 % voting agreement).| I missed both chances to cast my first vote and I have no excuse for this. I'll pay more attention to the referendums in the future. |
+|II |80%   |N/A   |   |  |
+|III|70%   |100%  |   |  |
+|IV |60%   |90%   |   |  |
+|V  |50%   |80%   |   |  |
+|VI |40%   |70%   |   |  |
+
+
+## Misc
+
+- [ ] Question(s):
+
+- [ ] Concern(s):
+
+- [ ] Comment(s):
+