From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:48:14 -0700 Received: from mail-oo1-f63.google.com ([209.85.161.63]) by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rpd0A-0005b0-2e for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:48:14 -0700 Received: by mail-oo1-f63.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5a061ace71fsf295134eaf.1 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:48:13 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1711583287; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=kvrpYcwuqWu2L3tFUXa2XZ9xjQmN1TEf4m9YOrM0B4mkADtRiAzbZHe2AvlJtRDS1u 9XHKjFcmFXu5sTtiv03QeL/DndXgS48pI7UpR5+QmCwE0KczvRiSV/P6eO2ms3jemPp8 tveQmVaJaebp8PEbZlE8nZ2QFZNgKd4CxifQczgoxoZAkm47IMRNCJXbLXexGDAM6eJD YHKXoPTK387zwxLyYXL0kDspVh7T/9T5zQ+E+w7jFBUi2vQ/IaxmNmYpxf/0TNcG8WjU 4qrTvotncfWHGMXlUVLHUHY5CNjIBPswCpjE8L+1QqKYRFRYTLEkRjIGZ2KS7KgskszO t13A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:sender:dkim-signature :dkim-signature; bh=wcBndXUxYkghnZtlfHWg/YbPqScVOUHybnP97tZ92fY=; fh=Uvq6GHZKrLjjvMEqDC2eFwAhehp4wFfje2Y++PZnBiw=; b=F4YYaLnY7ZLdjD8MB3AKpLN6QHT5tG948vxJ2jyaHdcA7dcRvNbFdnojNUbazYzPTd maUAKh2ej4kH+Ft50nYHPITiuN4AkkSK3cSGJ+so2SLEn3u5FDalxirFx9XawoaNHOa6 v6QOs0EY4iFRU33qOXA6YOgTHjxb13n8fu+0S4kYNIZ2Lieieci2OnM4wr+b7KMzx73C AGWUko8hQgjJry9x+cb0T2v5hNa6KiPWsEF0iLHeZxPS5YUAcaZh2jVlEO+JAqTozI6c Gb4OI8/GVbm86bR1vgtWKJulkYVnY0x8KRrIGvuwH5cXpqDX3fRbO7FP96wenSS9PRYm nX7Q==; darn=gnusha.org ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=cDungKrs; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1711583287; x=1712188087; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=wcBndXUxYkghnZtlfHWg/YbPqScVOUHybnP97tZ92fY=; b=w7OOEq2YoOtcV4Fzl2DyWBg82+JbwJyIuWGmulO6S8L9ZnrZrb9ZEWTTYqV4Fcv3dB ll9EQAw/ppLqwc8tFdF/H6d5dVwr/nrIWw1wk4MjFs3I59qb7TzID00M35R6syCXnLWQ xYdD7L6RkZP7MGs8QOY7G3CngnH9Vknr6kNzVJODvWm6S8xr8ukA2OeGR1h7Bgwr/jiL I9OjIPn05SRlf29ThHIB67crH/lt9W6xYUEMTe4o4cpnZrKCz9zLkTuhCPVCUQN486q6 cTkuhhkbUmM51r33gu1rZKbp08It1jNBMUSV/MtYVcSum1AHXaTsZT04qOhDz9K8dLui kaTQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1711583287; x=1712188087; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wcBndXUxYkghnZtlfHWg/YbPqScVOUHybnP97tZ92fY=; b=RpmtbLb6NbxtV8rxLiCY/a0hXBbt+aI3nWAwQg4S0kFCjKbqeujKucKq1/UG4kuzkj +xSjltYIfTvOKkpdIB5984K18PYmEJidPbWDd1Sn41RXlfCuz2d18xcsRiNF64PBcO9a iV3JUzDVgs4CIk0bjeGbA2yA5m8ATzPLKIAE6WboY91AyK2LJUFr2cDaVN/1lzOMTzBt Ix5NB8KGZEHS0vlDIVbdj4YfnSzONlqvsL840z7TdLDqJeQO8N0rbDBwfYYLmarbTMID nM6Wigh6VSIiY1TcNiX1bALj4gMxOdKU+gShRweeIul6E6hT/BjcwO8w8C4fB/qBNdD1 cWTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711583287; x=1712188087; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:x-beenthere:x-gm-message-state:sender:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wcBndXUxYkghnZtlfHWg/YbPqScVOUHybnP97tZ92fY=; b=w229DOrd/k5ADVjUEl0Ww4+NmDnIxHIpbHDPJSFtvIn0RXTwSC/rZQzBppr46APZdK emsWmQo18S82Z7KXhjRc7juRjpgb6Iwj8tDclPwGp/97JsqQ3Wg8hSOdAQuoc1zPZ8n2 e2XBbhSArFZ0Aol5wm7LAzCPAN9GTszJtJNIFeyEMUlIXetfrUOXjZbFsWt9rmtjfso4 aT8bcneWLjOWl+gDr4CSWvK8gEDK0peHz0Y3XdmrZY2drcPyZgzUqfDMCn3E0zyDcpCS whZK9pVpkM/4pObCshQkqHlS5bSZKao0rfJUIwPAvl2viI/coeHxYYf/7eC6MG64x13t pQFw== Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCVoDKzHfDG87ABQlhXMjABLJc7B85ApHLcCe6ijm30H5d2H5CjjPjHqk/h9zjiRFEwtN1eNmiZIi5gQVsRSa9kvsXGpwms= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxhXKPbc8kyBOPNZxEl3A+NVn+mnB+sMRAfdaIIJAzCrFtfE5OC +rwqbb7IXxqpLoI9QF4MLV9QGiSNmEpTFd04DqTUlobMYOPLH2Dm X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHBVaazHZgzABn53/54CyHXU8/8BJAs+st1TFccHCMJKg3xb473nntiObFFuyD4gJZ3mYDzDg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6871:280d:b0:22a:a40c:4bf2 with SMTP id bp13-20020a056871280d00b0022aa40c4bf2mr186189oac.14.1711583287558; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:48:07 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a05:6870:200f:b0:22a:a2ad:908 with SMTP id o15-20020a056870200f00b0022aa2ad0908ls185483oab.0.-pod-prod-05-us; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:48:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:d286:b0:21e:43c5:641f with SMTP id d6-20020a056870d28600b0021e43c5641fmr84875oae.4.1711583286867; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 2002:a05:6808:19a3:b0:3c3:cc75:72a7 with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3c3de8ca926msb6e; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:37:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6d11:0:b0:6e6:c69c:9ff9 with SMTP id o17-20020a9d6d11000000b006e6c69c9ff9mr1629974otp.3.1711582619992; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:36:59 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1711582619; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=K/Ho3tAes4Zgx/M9XJ/fFk9JUi7QF3GjWSG/27M5qOdOiy/ONLkk/SIqz3/XscAAWd b/N+7xscwRhxiAqzT3b9JEdflkBcc3ZGWVOcKHkoonx7Ue4I/wOOl0mIXkrj68NPe6Be FTYTtMgHpv2+BbLMZt6tpKFzEvdFkC9QTzmm35sXzyHd5UJSya1EZBRLumla9sxUM7yp TLdquEVZAwSa47Zt6zJkNCB6lygy9/vonQBT2igMZPkQOOS96SomqL6CgiYjmr6UQJ0D Z55LGdevD6+mnISXWVosnoEuRlkoYOmcdM+lJCOLFNc7HgyyJ+fmZ4eOh7iDVa244y5p e/Tg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=B3B0tgCmkVjujs7/A/J2jCDcz/237NDPM/1sT4y8+0g=; fh=foaZ9w3C3c5ltuXRyLrsJcSZd5F+/L4e8AHpKYxjE8o=; b=dqpH0kywnNF2MRDpY4/mXZWb6C8xKTIPC1wToj6KKZvThceFH8pKSJ2GvGHWe5g87w Se/Ai72PxwpIZ+VG5rObFXHv0jD+7I/J8/6J2vmM0T41jI/BT5aakmcTnQT989FOKDCK KUxCT3bc2egVba+XOjOcpWV8o86hl0bLwwqlrZS4PtH64tdiWfchfIiMmxnKt+wTO9uh jjh/+b7r58SYo2vOKltT8kE13S2+cp9uCRtUUKB1HDaAzXO6PijznslZydBpI79jqbTI hzRNsmXHVB6uBXfW+289KxGyGHohnUG5LoKpKjxinuOimWmAkqC+wzQId0jzST/Fjj4R e5rQ==; dara=google.com ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=cDungKrs; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: from mail-vk1-xa32.google.com (mail-vk1-xa32.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t15-20020a05683014cf00b006e6c068a73fsi19519otq.4.2024.03.27.16.36.59 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32; Received: by mail-vk1-xa32.google.com with SMTP id 71dfb90a1353d-4d42d18bd63so131392e0c.2 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:36:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:d9f:b0:4d4:19e9:db0 with SMTP id bc31-20020a0561220d9f00b004d419e90db0mr1864381vkb.0.1711582619266; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:36:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 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> In-Reply-To: <52a0d792-d99f-4360-ba34-0b12de183fef@murch.one> From: Keagan McClelland Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:36:48 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Re: Adding New BIP Editors To: Murch Cc: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000067ab10614ace2b1" X-Original-Sender: keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=cDungKrs; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keagan.mcclelland@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=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 (/) --000000000000067ab10614ace2b1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support this as a go forward plan. On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 2:56=E2=80=AFPM Murch wrote: > Hey everyone, > > 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 repository, > and the contributors to the repository that additional help is desirable. > > I have seen some support and reservations raised for pretty much every > candidate. A few weeks have passed since this topic was last active. So > far, there seems no clear path forward. > > If we are all just in a holding pattern, perhaps we could timebox 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 as new > editors to the repository on the following Monday (April 8th). If none > get broad support, at least we=E2=80=99d be able to move on and try somet= hing else. > > I propose that all editors share the same privileges, especially that > any editor may assign numbers to BIPs. If there is guidance to be > provided on the process of assigning numbers and number ranges for > specific topics, it should be provided by then. If the editors decide on > a single number authority among themselves, that would also be fine as > long as it doesn=E2=80=99t become a bottleneck. > > As Tim and Chris have suggested, it seems reasonable to me that > assessment of the technical soundness can be left to the audience. 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 treat= ed as > an unequivocal endorsement or implementation recommendation. > > Cheers, > Murch > > > 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 definitely needs dev > >>> skills (mainly for technical soundness). > >> > >> I'm aware that checking technical soundness is in accordance with BIP2 > >> [1], but I believe that this is one of the main problems of the curren= t > >> process, and I can imagine that this is what eats the time of editors. > >> > >> I'd prefer a BIP process in which the editors merely check that the > >> proposal is related to the Bitcoin ecosystem and meets some 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 following: > >> > >> - Read the BIP to check if it is ready: sound and complete. The ideas > >> must make technical sense, even if they don't seem likely to be > >> accepted. > >> [...]" > > -- > 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 > email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/52a0d792-d99f-4360-ba34-0b12= de183fef%40murch.one > . > --=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/CALeFGL2SJdKFaY6MeyXjQ5RJM4Va2Hh%3DNeRB8wthARbDSBZsvw%40mail.gma= il.com. --000000000000067ab10614ace2b1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I support this as a go forward plan.

On Wed, Mar 27, 20= 24 at 2:56=E2=80=AFPM Murch <murch@murch.one> wrote:
Hey everyone,

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 repository, and the contributors to the repository that additional help is desirable.
I have seen some support and reservations raised for pretty much every
candidate. A few weeks have passed since this topic was last active. So far, there seems no clear path forward.

If we are all just in a holding pattern, perhaps we could timebox 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 as new
editors to the repository on the following Monday (April 8th). If none
get broad support, at least we=E2=80=99d be able to move on and try somethi= ng else.

I propose that all editors share the same privileges, especially that
any editor may assign numbers to BIPs. If there is guidance to be
provided on the process of assigning numbers and number ranges for
specific topics, it should be provided by then. If the editors decide on a single number authority among themselves, that would also be fine as
long as it doesn=E2=80=99t become a bottleneck.

As Tim and Chris have suggested, it seems reasonable to me that
assessment of the technical soundness can be left to the audience. BIPs have been published in the repository and set to the "rejected" s= tatus
before, so it=E2=80=99s not as if adding a BIP to the repository is treated= as
an unequivocal endorsement or implementation recommendation.

Cheers,
Murch


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 g= reat
> candidates.
>
> On Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 10:55:52=E2=80=AFAM UTC-6 Tim Ruffin= g 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 definitely need= s dev
>>> skills (mainly for technical soundness).
>>
>> I'm aware that checking technical soundness is in accordance w= ith BIP2
>> [1], but I believe that this is one of the main problems of the cu= rrent
>> process, and I can imagine that this is what eats the time of edit= ors.
>>
>> I'd prefer a BIP process in which the editors merely check tha= t the
>> proposal is related to the Bitcoin ecosystem and meets some minima= l
>> formal criteria that we already enforce now (i.e., is a full self-=
>> contained document, has the required sections, etc...). This relie= ves
>> the editors not just from the effort, but also from the responsibi= lity
>> 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 following:=
>>
>> - Read the BIP to check if it is ready: sound and complete. The id= eas
>> must make technical sense, even if they don't seem likely to b= e
>> accepted.
>> [...]"

--
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 bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoin= dev/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.go= ogle.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2SJdKFaY6MeyXjQ5RJM4Va2Hh%3DNeRB8wthARbD= SBZsvw%40mail.gmail.com.
--000000000000067ab10614ace2b1--