public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [bitcoin-dev] Status updates for BIP 9, 68, 112, and 113
@ 2016-07-15 16:08 Luke Dashjr
  2016-07-15 16:31 ` Peter Todd
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Luke Dashjr @ 2016-07-15 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion

Daniel Cousens opened the issue a few weeks ago, that BIP 9 should progress to 
Accepted stage. However, as an informational BIP, it is not entirely clear on 
whether it falls in the Draft/Accepted/Final classification of proposals 
requiring implementation, or the Draft/Active classification like process 
BIPs. Background of this discussion is at:
    https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/413
(Discussion on the GitHub BIPs repo is *NOT* recommended, hence bringing this 
topic to the mailing list)

Reviewing the criteria for status changes, my opinion is that:
- BIPs 68, 112, 113, and 141 are themselves implementations of BIP 9
-- therefore, BIP 9 falls under the Draft/Accepted/Final class
- BIPs 68, 112, and 113 have been deployed to the network successfully
-- therefore, BIP 9 has satisfied the conditions of not only Accepted status,
   but also Final status
-- therefore, BIPs 68, 112, and 113 also ought to be Final status

If there are no objections, I plan to update the status to Final for BIPs 9, 
68, 112, and 113 in one month. Since all four BIPs are currently Draft, I also 
need at least one author from each BIP to sign-off on promoting them to (and 
beyond) Accepted.

BIP   9: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
         Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
         Greg Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
         Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>

BIP  68: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
         BtcDrak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
         Nicolas Dorier <nicolas.dorier@gmail.com>
         kinoshitajona <kinoshitajona@gmail.com>

BIP 112: BtcDrak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
         Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
         Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>

BIP 113: Thomas Kerin <me@thomaskerin.io>
         Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoin-dev] Status updates for BIP 9, 68, 112, and 113
@ 2016-08-18 21:09 Luke Dashjr
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Luke Dashjr @ 2016-08-18 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion

On Friday, July 15, 2016 4:46:57 PM Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 03:52:37PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> > On Friday, July 15, 2016 3:46:28 PM Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:
> > > I'm not sure why it is labeled as only "Informational" in the first
> > > place, as BIP9 is part of the consensus logic.
> > 
> > Only by proxy/inclusion from another BIP, such as 68, 112, and 113. In
> > other words, BIP 9 is informational in that it advises how other BIPs
> > might deploy themselves.
> 
> It's a bit of grey area, as indeed, only the BIPs that are actual softforks
> are consensus changes - which employ this mechanism for deployment. But I
> think such an important deployment mechanism, which is supposed to be used
> by all softforks from now onwards, shouldn't just be an informational BIP.

As things stand right now, none of the Authors have commented on changing the 
type. It has been a month, and I am prepared to change the status to Final or 
Active; but I am unclear if your comments were an objection to changing the 
status or not.

Last call: Does anyone mind if I update BIP 9 to Final status?

Luke


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <201607151531.00058.luke@dashjr.org>]

end of thread, other threads:[~2016-08-18 23:06 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-07-15 16:08 [bitcoin-dev] Status updates for BIP 9, 68, 112, and 113 Luke Dashjr
2016-07-15 16:31 ` Peter Todd
2016-08-18 21:09 Luke Dashjr
     [not found] <201607151531.00058.luke@dashjr.org>
2016-08-18 23:05 ` Btc Drak

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox