From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 02:11:37 -0700 Received: from mail-yw1-f191.google.com ([209.85.128.191]) by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rrDhY-0003QW-7W for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2024 02:11:37 -0700 Received: by mail-yw1-f191.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-609fe93b5cfsf56518477b3.0 for ; Mon, 01 Apr 2024 02:11:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1711962689; x=1712567489; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:sender:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=3PMTRNvD7DS660bnpY0uZdKNFQwDugApSuc4/pObOHs=; b=AQnJxilBLPiJPxOmdqElXjD1t9BIzVNUH+jGAhEiCpItGSlDIWkLMAjedEN3W6tRZP OBgscHcQSuLXMSSyeJJbHiyATBpj+UNhpqKKGFdwmrNOtM/OL0zuaI1ko5Vo8a4tWcdV QA+O7w+Cmgw0b0iakgVc6njp+FQWjeuh4Jf0w9fGPvJHLLc6O1NLiMW5J8KeyB8U7Xd9 YJjYOjVSnCDV7Jf8t3IiarkmcIawsmbO1wLWnjk/EHVtpiPXa1KRbsikja+JGMeLm4gi Mi4kjLTMsdJZxHTMOu6R9joFdBhahQmhQHMeOnidpZPizIlaBUlLhh5KqW5tCA/l6d2a 0rjA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1711962689; x=1712567489; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=3PMTRNvD7DS660bnpY0uZdKNFQwDugApSuc4/pObOHs=; b=WiM2dZoWX5Z6JssIBhUUDZyVjHr+sVSdZSTkCIVcQpxCNayNe2XkkpsKM6Yhkz5nPR y6CrhroO7iJKPzfuCd0i2wZ6lTifI9RMDQ8Mrwzlz9RB48NylKwBctzc4E5PQdkxmJGu /fV/L/FtbiAxmwD6Sj4IgK3x9dkEBebS7NCIeSj9je06NwysGnQOrXYhlWn7a5MnAqwJ Om1rTdEqOYBK7aqli2vZ884uMuMPtiw3UwKwH2cjX0eMpJrBqcbpr6XNWbdaovonRuGP dXNnWWn0xR7VTFycJF3Tn10NvW+jRM/AogB1LQux6wrQtOqyzQgsDB99IU6XQsvIWkAM 9Fig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711962689; x=1712567489; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-sender:mime-version :subject:references:in-reply-to:message-id:to:from:date:x-beenthere :x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=3PMTRNvD7DS660bnpY0uZdKNFQwDugApSuc4/pObOHs=; b=fTvpOS6SriUNa9zda0S0soKsK4kQ5QooVnirTydaQOA114Yet///yTIi80qGhiwO1z HCxHSA6TemwCyZRaWtAZp3ieBOjB79LlW9RpJZLwfTb/Nss4QG5iZswoASoYgmJDUm0Y SfxygW9gcD5iIjbwLGaiWAaWnMrFxn8eEznSBoZ+vimAzDbOWgK1Z8NVyBSGJbblRm1q jbPDYzvxaiX5hfeF7r+f74mHECGhy83hR6HIyIU1+lNQRV5IxdJxR+jOamHPtbsOO5Oz 7Qyc12Fk+vlr1ZFRByAyF1psnA+bjQlVJ6kX0DzqQyeo+bjfZMFY/gdeKxy75v+7j/Vz 6r1w== Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUykep56Z4b02BqF51ufCsA9wMhAEVHAjPpWVqq17gC3hFQt3UXg+DtIRJmO/ul0CBfGrd6HLoCFhAP8CRUAGn2oWR4qOw= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz/B4qbzV1CUI8z8Xn4WyQSt/zqKewuqJCSI/UBl5yxSmLXInL1 Za6vDe6kk0v8DnbtpB6BcAfhX7jT12N2F3wWav77WpVLqiC1CA/K X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHlZs91wNFsBoL+43pFwFdVJiico1coUopjt9ltz0r41PjZn3t/U+i4tqVI01hlVdNg1GcSjA== X-Received: by 2002:a25:9183:0:b0:dcc:8aaa:3ed3 with SMTP id w3-20020a259183000000b00dcc8aaa3ed3mr6520259ybl.16.1711962689504; Mon, 01 Apr 2024 02:11:29 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a25:acdf:0:b0:dcb:bfe0:81b8 with SMTP id x31-20020a25acdf000000b00dcbbfe081b8ls293651ybd.0.-pod-prod-09-us; Mon, 01 Apr 2024 02:11:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:1b8f:b0:dc6:d233:ffdd with SMTP id ei15-20020a0569021b8f00b00dc6d233ffddmr3023610ybb.0.1711962688206; Mon, 01 Apr 2024 02:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 2002:a05:690c:3:b0:611:9f18:9d1 with SMTP id 00721157ae682-61431553f96ms7b3; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 23:21:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:2586:b0:dc7:53a0:83ad with SMTP id du6-20020a056902258600b00dc753a083admr2768941ybb.5.1711952516360; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 23:21:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 23:21:55 -0700 (PDT) From: /dev /fd0 To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List Message-Id: <4884f5b9-69d5-45be-90d2-7369784ddd72n@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: <2092f7ff-4860-47f8-ba1a-c9d97927551e@achow101.com> <9288df7b-f2e9-4106-b843-c1ff8f8a62a3@dashjr.org> <42e6c1d1d39d811e2fe7c4c5ce6e09c705bd3dbb.camel@timruffing.de> <52a0d792-d99f-4360-ba34-0b12de183fef@murch.one> Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Re: Adding New BIP Editors MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_47922_1388235769.1711952515925" X-Original-Sender: alicexbtong@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) ------=_Part_47922_1388235769.1711952515925 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_47923_2145405114.1711952515925" ------=_Part_47923_2145405114.1711952515925 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable An alternative approach for BIP numbers: 1. A bot assigns a temporary number to each pull request opened with "NEW:"= =20 in title based on GitHub pull request number and append B in front of it.= =20 Example: B1551 2. BIP editors and others could review to improve the BIP documentation.=20 BIP author can use this number for the BIP until pull request is open. 3. Once the pull request is merged, it is assigned a permanent number which= =20 can be used to refer this doc in future. Both numbers would stay relevant and if someone is not aware of permanent= =20 number, they could easily check it by opening pull request. Other things CI can be used for: - Automated grammar check when pull request is opened/re-opened - Publish a copy of BIP as torrent or nostr event etc. when pull request is= =20 merged /dev/fd0 floppy disk guy On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 6:31:14=E2=80=AFPM UTC Ava Chow wrote: Thanks for bringing this back up again. I agree that we should try to=20 move forward on this, and this timeline seems reasonable to me.=20 Kanzure, Ruben, Roasbeef, Murch, and Jonatack all have my support to be=20 BIP editors with all privileges and responsibilities as laid out in BIP 2.= =20 Regarding guidance on assigning BIP numbers, if there is no guidance=20 provided by Luke to the new BIP editors when their permissions are=20 granted, I would also support simply creating their own numbering scheme=20 and begin assigning new BIP numbers. It's ridiculous that we should be=20 bottlenecked on simply what number a proposal should have.=20 Ava=20 On 03/27/2024 05:25 PM, Murch wrote:=20 > Hey everyone,=20 >=20 > I wanted to check in on the topic adding BIP Editors. There seem to be a= =20 > number of candidates that are willing and able, and there seems to be=20 > broad agreement among the current editor, the readers of the repository,= =20 > and the contributors to the repository that additional help is desirable.= =20 >=20 > I have seen some support and reservations raised for pretty much every=20 > candidate. A few weeks have passed since this topic was last active. So= =20 > far, there seems no clear path forward.=20 >=20 > If we are all just in a holding pattern, perhaps we could timebox this=20 > decision process: how about we invite arguments for and against any=20 > candidates in this thread until next Friday EOD (April 5th). If any=20 > candidates find broad support, those candidates could be added as new=20 > editors to the repository on the following Monday (April 8th). If none=20 > get broad support, at least we=E2=80=99d be able to move on and try somet= hing=20 else.=20 >=20 > I propose that all editors share the same privileges, especially that=20 > any editor may assign numbers to BIPs. If there is guidance to be=20 > provided on the process of assigning numbers and number ranges for=20 > specific topics, it should be provided by then. If the editors decide on= =20 > a single number authority among themselves, that would also be fine as=20 > long as it doesn=E2=80=99t become a bottleneck.=20 >=20 > As Tim and Chris have suggested, it seems reasonable to me that=20 > assessment of the technical soundness can be left to the audience. BIPs= =20 > have been published in the repository and set to the "rejected" status=20 > before, so it=E2=80=99s not as if adding a BIP to the repository is treat= ed as=20 > an unequivocal endorsement or implementation recommendation.=20 >=20 > Cheers,=20 > Murch=20 >=20 >=20 > On 3/14/24 07:56, Chris Stewart wrote:=20 >> I agree with Tim's thoughts here.=20 >>=20 >> I think Jon Atack, Reuben Somsen, Kanzure or Roasbeef would all make=20 great=20 >> candidates.=20 >>=20 >> On Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 10:55:52=E2=80=AFAM UTC-6 Tim Ruffing = wrote:=20 >>=20 >>> On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 17:40 -0500, Luke Dashjr wrote:=20 >>>> The hard part is evaluating=20 >>>> if the new proposal meets the criteria - which definitely needs dev=20 >>>> skills (mainly for technical soundness).=20 >>>=20 >>> I'm aware that checking technical soundness is in accordance with BIP2= =20 >>> [1], but I believe that this is one of the main problems of the current= =20 >>> process, and I can imagine that this is what eats the time of editors.= =20 >>>=20 >>> I'd prefer a BIP process in which the editors merely check that the=20 >>> proposal is related to the Bitcoin ecosystem and meets some minimal=20 >>> formal criteria that we already enforce now (i.e., is a full self-=20 >>> contained document, has the required sections, etc...). This relieves= =20 >>> the editors not just from the effort, but also from the responsibility= =20 >>> to do so. Technical soundness should be evaluated by the audience of a= =20 >>> BIP, not by the editor.=20 >>>=20 >>> Best,=20 >>> Tim=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> [1] BIP2 says:=20 >>> "For each new BIP that comes in an editor does the following:=20 >>>=20 >>> - Read the BIP to check if it is ready: sound and complete. The ideas= =20 >>> must make technical sense, even if they don't seem likely to be=20 >>> accepted.=20 >>> [...]"=20 >=20 > --=20 > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups= =20 "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.=20 > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an= =20 email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.=20 > To view this discussion on the web visit=20 https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/52a0d792-d99f-4360-ba34-0b12de= 183fef%40murch.one.=20 --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/= bitcoindev/4884f5b9-69d5-45be-90d2-7369784ddd72n%40googlegroups.com. ------=_Part_47923_2145405114.1711952515925 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable An alternative approach for BIP numbers:

1. A bot assi= gns a temporary number to each pull request opened with "NEW:" in title bas= ed on GitHub pull request number and append B in front of it. Example: B155= 1
2. BIP editors and others could review to improve the BIP docum= entation. BIP author can use this number for the BIP until pull request is = open.
3. Once the pull request is merged, it is assigned a perman= ent number which can be used to refer this doc in future.

<= /div>
Both numbers would stay relevant and if someone is not aware of p= ermanent number, they could easily check it by opening pull request.
<= div>
Other things CI can be used for:
- Automated= grammar check when pull request is opened/re-opened
- Publish a = copy of BIP as torrent or nostr event etc. when pull request is merged

/dev/fd0
floppy disk guy

<= div dir=3D"auto">On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 6:31:14=E2=80=AFPM UTC Ava Ch= ow wrote:
Thanks for bringin= g this back up again. I agree that we should try to=20
move forward on this, and this timeline seems reasonable to me.

Kanzure, Ruben, Roasbeef, Murch, and Jonatack all have my support to = be=20
BIP editors with all privileges and responsibilities as laid out in B= IP 2.

Regarding guidance on assigning BIP numbers, if there is no guidance= =20
provided by Luke to the new BIP editors when their permissions are=20
granted, I would also support simply creating their own numbering sch= eme=20
and begin assigning new BIP numbers. It's ridiculous that we should b= e=20
bottlenecked on simply what number a proposal should have.

Ava

On 03/27/2024 05:25 PM, Murch wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>=20
> I wanted to check in on the topic adding BIP Editors. There seem= to be a
> number of candidates that are willing and able, and there seems = to be
> broad agreement among the current editor, the readers of the rep= ository,
> and the contributors to the repository that additional help is d= esirable.
>=20
> I have seen some support and reservations raised for pretty much= every
> candidate. A few weeks have passed since this topic was last act= ive. So
> far, there seems no clear path forward.
>=20
> If we are all just in a holding pattern, perhaps we could timebo= x this
> decision process: how about we invite arguments for and against = any
> candidates in this thread until next Friday EOD (April 5th). If = any
> candidates find broad support, those candidates could be added a= s new
> editors to the repository on the following Monday (April 8th). I= f none
> get broad support, at least we=E2=80=99d be able to move on and = try something else.
>=20
> I propose that all editors share the same privileges, especially= that
> any editor may assign numbers to BIPs. If there is guidance to b= e
> provided on the process of assigning numbers and number ranges f= or
> specific topics, it should be provided by then. If the editors d= ecide on
> a single number authority among themselves, that would also be f= ine as
> long as it doesn=E2=80=99t become a bottleneck.
>=20
> As Tim and Chris have suggested, it seems reasonable to me that
> assessment of the technical soundness can be left to the audienc= e. BIPs
> have been published in the repository and set to the "rejected" = status
> before, so it=E2=80=99s not as if adding a BIP to the repository= is treated as
> an unequivocal endorsement or implementation recommendation.
>=20
> Cheers,
> Murch
>=20
>=20
> On 3/14/24 07:56, Chris Stewart wrote:
>> I agree with Tim's thoughts here.
>>
>> I think Jon Atack, Reuben Somsen, Kanzure or Roasbeef would = all make great
>> candidates.
>>
>> On Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 10:55:52=E2=80=AFAM UTC-6 = Tim Ruffing wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 17:40 -0500, Luke Dashjr wrote:
>>>> The hard part is evaluating
>>>> if the new proposal meets the criteria - which defin= itely needs dev
>>>> skills (mainly for technical soundness).
>>>
>>> I'm aware that checking technical soundness is in accord= ance with BIP2
>>> [1], but I believe that this is one of the main problems= of the current
>>> process, and I can imagine that this is what eats the ti= me of editors.
>>>
>>> I'd prefer a BIP process in which the editors merely che= ck that the
>>> proposal is related to the Bitcoin ecosystem and meets s= ome minimal
>>> formal criteria that we already enforce now (i.e., is a = full self-
>>> contained document, has the required sections, etc...). = This relieves
>>> the editors not just from the effort, but also from the = responsibility
>>> to do so. Technical soundness should be evaluated by the= audience of a
>>> BIP, not by the editor.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] BIP2 says:
>>> "For each new BIP that comes in an editor does the follo= wing:
>>>
>>> - Read the BIP to check if it is ready: sound and comple= te. The ideas
>>> must make technical sense, even if they don't seem likel= y to be
>>> accepted.
>>> [...]"
>=20
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog= le Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it= , send an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroup= s.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgi= d/bitcoindev/52a0d792-d99f-4360-ba34-0b12de183fef%40murch.one.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoind= ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg= id/bitcoindev/4884f5b9-69d5-45be-90d2-7369784ddd72n%40googlegroups.com.=
------=_Part_47923_2145405114.1711952515925-- ------=_Part_47922_1388235769.1711952515925--