From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25C4E108C for ; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 23:14:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail149056.authsmtp.com (outmail149056.authsmtp.com [62.13.149.56]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DAC8A5 for ; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 23:14:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) by punt22.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id tBVNEjwS082584; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 23:14:45 GMT Received: from muck (d23-16-73-171.bchsia.telus.net [23.16.73.171]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id tBVNEeNm036046 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 31 Dec 2015 23:14:44 GMT Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 15:14:40 -0800 From: Peter Todd To: Marco Pontello Message-ID: <20151231231440.GA5112@muck> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Server-Quench: 474db571-b014-11e5-829e-00151795d556 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aAdMdQMUHFAXAgsB AmMbWVdeUVl7XWc7 aQlPbANDZUlQXgJr T01BRU1TWkEaZ2J0 U2BDUhp0dwFANnh0 ZkYsWndfCBZ/ckdg EE5VEXAHZDJldWgd WRVFdwNVdQJNdxoR b1V5GhFYa3VsNCMk FAgyOXU9MCtqYA50 ekkLMFcYTFwQdgAA X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 23.16.73.171/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP numbers X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 23:14:48 -0000 --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 05:42:47PM +0100, Marco Pontello via bitcoin-dev wr= ote: > Sorry to ask again but... what's up with the BIP number assignments? > I thought that it was just more or less a formality, to avoid conflicts a= nd > BIP spamming. And that would be perfectly fine. > But since I see that it's a process that can take months (just looking at > the PR request list), it seems that something different is going on. Maybe > it's considered something that give an aura of officiality of sorts? But > that would make little sense, since that should come eventually with > subsequents steps (like adding a BIP to the main repo, and eventual > approvation). >=20 > Having # 333 assigned to a BIP, should just mean that's easy to refer to a > particular BIP. > That seems something that could be done quick and easily. >=20 > What I'm missing? Probably some historic context? You ever noticed how actually getting a BIP # assigned is the *last* thing the better known Bitcoin Core devs do? For instance, look at the segregated witness draft BIPs. I think we have problem with peoples' understanding of the Bitcoin consensus protocol development process being backwards: first write your protocol specification - the code - and then write the human readable reference explaining it - the BIP. Equally, without people actually using that protocol, who cares about the BIP? Personally if I were assigning BIP numbers I'd be inclined to say "fuck it" and only assign BIP numbers to BIPs after they've had significant adoption... It'd might just cause a lot less headache than the current system. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000006808135a221edd19be6b5b966c4621c41004d3d719d18b7 --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGrBAEBCACVBQJWhbbdXhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwNjgwODEzNWEyMjFlZGQxOWJlNmI1Yjk2NmM0NjIxYzQx MDA0ZDNkNzE5ZDE4YjcvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQwIXyHOf0udzcFAf+NVhkrSGfS4riJM/otzdeoyaN K2LRyN5VdaF+cwbxC8a2owuMQRe429mx2EVMUVzwF7GfK22OC8hus2mZII07xjic tJbeOjPbY72ADjDZ2xj4YbjdDaVTzFOVXNWyIVyFGmYFH3d5p/iityIfDIxHdOUf vBUl0SYY9GpRyePml4eV0+aO7+ofk2CbjLfJJphyzWxa07B1j6zy5hZULKcMHpmh WfNCt3GHqywjdU9b9WxvId0LtvuCPwnTgsgZFAlGyb5f2Su6UBPwdzWE7Zg1TI8D f5I5GfVw/tRKnoNIKvwXZw8akUwlNqJlifSwFn5nmt6lOhON43Qh/7Lvv97/Ew== =A/jg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+--