From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB7EC000B for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 21:14:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTP id 673EA8001F for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 21:14:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mattcorallo.com Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with UTF8SMTP id ejMPlzrOuQ7I for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 21:14:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail.as397444.net (mail.as397444.net [IPv6:2620:6e:a000:dead:beef:15:bad:f00d]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPS id 679A882C75 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 21:14:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.as397444.net (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id C2D3C5535A0; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 21:14:08 +0000 (UTC) X-DKIM-Note: Keys used to sign are likely public at https://as397444.net/dkim/ DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mattcorallo.com; s=1619383264; t=1619385248; bh=PyAGc+PcAg7tEJnYI5KY46XZyEn78wyJ5NMp00hbUzc=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=GLk2BBvDgS8qDaVIduGKK+lVxRsXXuCsfugfkagPexJcrURQ0vB9LRvSte0QGKJ6U xKkCUcR4wm6zzS75+zYwq3cVUNytzFQGMsRC7b5K7s/wc4hc1I/TbgF/IElTn1gFde T+g6pdjYv6eBQxlAUqq1/xVlngh0mDonP9oZZ0HHvqlaCm53sA+4AM2j8+S0U459ZH gLOnLBl185P5a7Qm6wCG0ZiWd281rPzccd3v8gMpLKrRYP1Fz0PacFeeCRBK/HeZFd I1tc94S624KYwVjqS/L1UzIXcKniiSCPEKKUf7KPlQz6YhfNMnC8yfB4tgldlex6aN K0NEFCKgLYtNg== Message-ID: <40214e32-ffb3-9518-7bc8-9c1059f50da7@mattcorallo.com> Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 17:14:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Luke Dashjr References: <202104230209.05373.luke@dashjr.org> <64807e52-14ea-198b-4caf-29be92e89655@mattcorallo.com> <202104252100.07296.luke@dashjr.org> From: Matt Corallo In-Reply-To: <202104252100.07296.luke@dashjr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Reminder on the Purpose of BIPs X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 21:14:11 -0000 On 4/25/21 17:00, Luke Dashjr wrote: > On Sunday 25 April 2021 20:29:44 Matt Corallo wrote: >> If the BIP editor is deliberately refusing to accept changes which the >> author's approval (which appears to be occurring here), > > It isn't. I am triaging BIPs PRs the same as I have for years, and will get to > them all in due time, likely before the end of the month. Please don't play dumb, it isn't a good look. > Rather, what we have going on is a few bad actors trying to misportray the > BIPs as an approval process so they can pretend ST is somehow official, or > that the preexisting Core+Taproot client is "breaking" the spec. And to > further their agenda, they have been harassing me demanding special > treatment. I'd be curious who is doing that, because obviously I'd agree that merging something in a BIP doesn't really have any special meaning. This, however, is a completely different topic from following the BIP process that you had a key hand in crafting. > I will not become an accomplice to this deception by giving special treatment, > and will process the BIP PR neutrally according to the currently-defined BIP > process. Again, please don't play dumb, no one watching believes this - you've been active on the BIP repo on numerous PRs and this has never in the past been the case. > Despite the continual harassment, I have even made two efforts to try to > (fairly) make things faster, and have been obstructed both times by ST > advocates. It appears they intend to paint me as "deliberately refusing" (to > use your words) in order to try to put Bitcoin and the BIP process under > their control, and abuse it in the same manner in which they abused Bitcoin > Core's usual standards (by releasing ST without community consensus). > > Luke >