public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Antoine Riard <antoine.riard@gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>,
	 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP editor: Kalle Alm
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 11:34:53 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALZpt+Hz3jFnA8z1w6yictdHWnnKReMK+6eEHg_jUZ7==xNZzQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202104230209.05373.luke@dashjr.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2431 bytes --]

Hi Luke,

For the records and the subscribers of this list not following
#bitcoin-core-dev, this mail follows a discussion which did happen during
yesterday irc meetings.
Logs here : http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/2021-04-22.log

I'll reiterate my opinion expressed during the meeting. If this proposal to
extend the bip editorship membership doesn't satisfy parties involved or
anyone in the community, I'm strongly opposed to have the matter sliced by
admins of the Bitcoin github org. I believe that defect or uncertainty in
the BIP Process shouldn't be solved by GH janitorial roles and I think
their roles don't bestow to intervene in case of loopholes. Further, you
have far more contributors involved in the BIP Process rather than only
Bitcoin Core ones. FWIW, such precedent merits would be quite similar to
lobby directly GH staff...

Unless we harm Bitcoin users by not acting, I think we should always be
respectful of procedural forms. And in the lack of such forms, stay patient
until a solution satisfy everyone.

I would recommend the BIP editorship, once extended or not, to move in its
own repository in the future.

Cheers,
Antoine




Le jeu. 22 avr. 2021 à 22:09, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> a écrit :

> Unless there are objections, I intend to add Kalle Alm as a BIP editor to
> assist in merging PRs into the bips git repo.
>
> Since there is no explicit process to adding BIP editors, IMO it should be
> fine to use BIP 2's Process BIP progression:
>
> > A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it achieves
> > rough consensus on the mailing list. Such a proposal is said to have
> > rough consensus if it has been open to discussion on the development
> > mailing list for at least one month, and no person maintains any
> > unaddressed substantiated objections to it.
>
> A Process BIP could be opened for each new editor, but IMO that is
> unnecessary. If anyone feels there is a need for a new Process BIP, we can
> go
> that route, but there is prior precedent for BIP editors appointing new
> BIP
> editors, so I think this should be fine.
>
> Please speak up soon if you disagree.
>
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3171 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-04-23 15:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ 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 [this message]
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
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
2021-04-24  4:42 Greg Maxwell
2021-04-24 14:45 ` Matt Corallo
2021-04-26  0:36 ` David A. Harding
2021-04-27 22:30   ` Jaime Caring
2021-04-28  9:52     ` Amir Taaki
2021-04-30 15:39       ` Karl
2021-04-30 16:58       ` Jameson Lopp

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='CALZpt+Hz3jFnA8z1w6yictdHWnnKReMK+6eEHg_jUZ7==xNZzQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=antoine.riard@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=luke@dashjr.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