public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: "David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt.org>,
	 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Reminder on the Purpose of BIPs
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 20:04:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgRZwf=SBB4EvpeTBLshRfT1tmnv33GP+Ln+w2bxt48=pA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210426194309.2k5exujz23vjrgwc@ganymede>

I endorse Harding's recommendations.  On the point about mirroring,
one thing to keep in mind is that the other repositories may go
offline.

Modification confusion could be avoided by recording what revision
(commit hash) was current at the time of inclusion, but the document
going offline can only be protected against by maintaining a copy
somewhere.


On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 7:44 PM David A. Harding via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 05:31:50PM -0400, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > In general, I think its time we all agree the BIP process has simply failed
> > and move on. Luckily its not really all that critical and proposed protocol
> > documents can be placed nearly anywhere with the same effect.
>
> I recommend:
>
> 1. We add additional BIP editors, starting with Kalle Alm (if there are
>    no continuing significant objections).
>
> 2. We seek Luke Dashjr's resignation as BIPs editor.
>
> 3. We begin treating protocol documents outside the BIPs repository as
>    first-class BIP documentation.
>
> The first recommendation permits continued maintenance of existing BIPs
> plus gives the additional maintainers an opportunity to rebuild the
> credibility of the repository.
>
> The second recommendation addresses the dissatisfaction of many BIP
> authors and potential authors with the current editor, which I think
> will discourage many of them from making additional significant
> contributions to the repository.  It also seems to me to be a better use
> of Luke's talents and interests for him to focus on protocol research
> and review rather than procedurally checking whether a bunch of
> documents are well formed.
>
> The third recommendation provides an escape hatch for anyone, such as
> Matt, who currently thinks the process has failed, or for anyone who
> comes to that same conclusion in the future under a different editing
> team.  My specific recommendations there are:
>
> a. Anyone writing protocol documentation in the spirit of the BIP
>    process can post their idea to this mailing list like we've always
>    done and, when they've finished collecting initial feedback, they can
>    assign themselves a unique decentralized identifier starting with
>    "bip-".  They may also define a shorter alias that they encourage
>    people to use in cases where the correct document can be inferred
>    from context.  E.g.,
>
>       bip-wuille-taproot (bip-taproot)
>       bip-towns-versionbits-min-activation-height (bip-vbmah)
>       bip-todd-harding-opt-in-replace-by-fee (bip-opt-in-rbf)
>
> b. The author then publishes the document to any place they'd like, although
>    they are strongly encouraged to make any document source available
>    under an open license to ensure others can create their own
>    modifications.
>
> c. Implementations of BIPs, whether original repository BIPs or
>    decentralized BIPs, link to the BIPs they implement to ensure
>    researchers and developers can find the relevant protocol
>    documentation.  E.g.,
>    https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/fe5e495c31de47b0ec732b943db11fe345d874af/doc/bips.md
>
>      (It may also be advisable for implementations to mirror copies of
>      the BIPs they implement so later modifications to the document
>      don't confuse anyone.  For this reason, extremely liberal
>      licensing of BIP documents is encouraged.)
>
> d. To help maintain quality and consistency between documentation, the
>    BIP editors provide a BIP document template, guidelines similar to
>    the existing BIP2, and an easy-to-run format linter.
>
> I think this decentralized BIPs alternative also helps address some
> longstanding problems with the BIPs system: that many casual Bitcoin
> users and developers think of documents in the BIPs repo as
> authoritative and that there are some development teams (such as for LN)
> that have already abandoned the BIPs process because, in part, they want
> complete control over their own documentation.
>
> The recommendations above were developed based on conversations I had
> with a few stakeholders in the BIPs process, but I did not attempt a
> comprehensive survey and I certainly don't claim to speak for anyone
> else.  I hope the recommendations are satisfactory and I look forward to
> your feedback.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Dave
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-26 20:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-23  2:09 [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP editor: Kalle Alm Luke Dashjr
2021-04-23  3:36 ` Jeremy
2021-04-23  7:49   ` John Newbery
2021-04-23  7:50 ` Pindar Wong
2021-04-23  9:11   ` Eric Martindale
2021-04-23 15:34 ` Antoine Riard
2021-04-24 10:16   ` nopara73
2021-04-25 20:29   ` [bitcoin-dev] Reminder on the Purpose of BIPs Matt Corallo
2021-04-25 21:00     ` Luke Dashjr
2021-04-25 21:14       ` Matt Corallo
2021-04-25 21:22         ` Luke Dashjr
2021-04-25 21:31           ` Matt Corallo
2021-04-26 19:43             ` David A. Harding
2021-04-26 20:04               ` Greg Maxwell [this message]
2021-04-27 19:43                 ` Melvin Carvalho
2021-04-27  9:04               ` W. J. van der Laan
2021-04-27 11:49                 ` Erik Aronesty
2021-04-27 11:33               ` John Newbery
2021-04-27 12:16       ` Jorge Timón
2021-04-26 15:02 ` [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP editor: Kalle Alm Sjors Provoost
2021-04-26 16:56   ` James O'Beirne
2021-04-26 18:13 ` W. J. van der Laan
2021-09-15  9:50 [bitcoin-dev] Reminder on the Purpose of BIPs Prayank

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAAS2fgRZwf=SBB4EvpeTBLshRfT1tmnv33GP+Ln+w2bxt48=pA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=gmaxwell@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=dave@dtrt.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox