From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VYVdK-0000bV-Ji for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:40:02 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from chrocht.moloch.sk ([62.176.169.44] helo=mail.moloch.sk) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1VYVdG-0001ZD-Ko for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:40:02 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.102] (ip66.bbxnet.sk [91.219.133.66]) by mail.moloch.sk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 668631801A61; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:39:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <52661DB7.7040805@250bpm.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:39:51 +0200 From: Martin Sustrik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Luke-Jr , bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: <791a727f-2188-4848-bd77-ea733c8c5c2c@me.com> <201310211947.59640.luke@dashjr.org> In-Reply-To: <201310211947.59640.luke@dashjr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1VYVdG-0001ZD-Ko Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:40:02 -0000 On 21/10/13 21:47, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Monday, October 21, 2013 7:38:37 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: >> 1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)? > > Probably wouldn't hurt, but it'd likely need a rewrite in a more modular and > formal form. I wanted to have a look at how the whole Bitcoin thing works recently. Being a distributed application, I've searched for the protocol spec. What I found were two wiki pages (Protocol & ProtocolRules) that looked more like notes someone wrote down while implementing the application. Have I missed something? Is there any effort underway trying to produce a decent spec? If not so, I am willing to help with that. Martin