Re: [Bitcoin-development] IRC meeting agenda, 18:00 UTC Thursday

["Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>]

On Tuesday, November 06, 2012 7:56:23 PM slush wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> > But more important to the success of BIP today, I think, is encouraging
> > wider community participation.
> 
> It's not about BIP process, it's possibly about content of particular
> proposals.
> ...
> I promised to write BIP draft for Stratum, I proposed and implemented
> get_transactions method to allow Stratum jobs inspection. What more do you
> want, seriously? I'm soo tired by you, Luke.

Perhaps the problem lies in misunderstanding of the BIP process, then, rather 
than awareness of it. BIP isn't just "write a document"; that's just the first 
step. The main thing is that it gets peer review, changed to meet the 
community's needs, and when done should result in a common standard suitable 
to the needs of the whole community. Whatever the reason, there was a failure 
of key members of the community to participate in the GBT BIP process and 
ensure it addressed their needs/wants; identifying and addressing that is 
something that would improve the BIP process.

get_transactions is a step in the right direction, and I don't think anyone 
expects Stratum to reach the same level as GBT overnight considering it took 
months for GBT (though I have no doubt now that the GBT discussions have taken 
place, that some dedicated individual could probably combine the two if they 
dedicated a few days to it). My comments, however, were not intended to bash 
stratum or mere complain about the past (it can't be changed), but an attempt 
to learn from the past and figure out how we can improve things the next time 
around.

Luke