For my part, I've been happy with the current group. While Murch and I have been the most visibly active day-to-day on the repository, the other editors have been very responsive in private messages and consultations to discuss BIPs issues. Two editors active day-to-day has been a fairly good number (easy to coordinate together, not too many cooks in the kitchen), while still benefitting from the implication and experience of the other editors on questions that come up. It has been an enjoyable collaboration and experience.

On Monday, July 14, 2025 at 7:28:16 PM UTC-6 Ava Chow wrote:

Hi All,

During last year's discussion on adding new BIP Editors, AJ [noted][1]
that it might be worthwhile to have some sort of review process of the
BIP Editors in order to import the BIPs process. Since it has been more
than a year since the new BIP Editors were added, it seems like a good
time to take a look back.

The 5 new BIP Editors were added in April of last year. In the time
since, the BIPs repository has seen a lot more action and the addition
of new BIP Editors seems to me to be quite successful.

In the 15 months prior to adding the new BIP Editors, the BIP Editors had:
- Left 80 comments
- Merged 44 PRs
- Closed 6 PRs
- Assigned 4 BIP numbers

In the 15 months since adding the new BIP Editors, the BIP Editors have:
- Left 1272 comments
- Merged 261 PRs
- Closed 122 PRs
- Assigned 22 BIP numbers

This improvement is very much welcome and the BIPs process no longer
feels stuck.

That being said, there is significant variance in the activity of the
Editors, with only a couple Editors accounting for the vast majority of
the aforementioned activity. This raises the question of whether all of
the current BIP Editors want to dedicate their time to serving the
community in this role, and whether there are others who could take
their place as well.

Thanks,
Ava

[1]: https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/cuMZ77KEQAA/m/hplkMlcmBwAJ