From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org> Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEEF3C0032 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99B1E4664C for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 99B1E4664C Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=O7iAqTfr X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f4ccnH5RBOLp for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7159F4AAFC for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 7159F4AAFC Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91FC35C00C3; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:11:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:11:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1698358312; x=1698444712; bh=cuw7+7wDuGZtB BTi5iAZc1U/sQZYegzwqlhSJHCwEIY=; b=O7iAqTfr1upxnYLKYuEWSIY5O5DLw 3b+qetdvyKirp4TJnbfj2mDRjBtB9OjHSFkGyCQ0FV1XWXu4J0ZX+CETRxjvwHvM /VUNNMuTm5NR7r10DtPX50SIuW1rg3nEuJAGxwP+8A4mxcUxXWf6pyYrzFW93dJC 5FdvFUXEFt4J7a56LS0oFFD+Kp1Qkc1ASc4nMFMC3Uw8oiQK6j5YDwlDIFXiA2FU g57EIKg09qOlhni1t+Ds+kxFvif8p8pKNaAJDlkpdZaPlaE6md4Lg+d/eJ9BpvXm yqSHMiG0WRigK/dEzG1EyTMxQ1kpn5kKdCNHlL4evt7gr5wKhu48eq+pA== X-ME-Sender: <xms:J-Q6ZVwawLPFdnqMsiB6ZPSnxKHAkTUb0mOwzfvHEH-wKfMXZFnRAw> <xme:J-Q6ZVT9P317VQhhRRl71VQflPBZ0z0t_9-OT60WIcvwWQsuVy3XhyS4U2zYrQJJB wj7PiVyPlCzLxjpEg4> X-ME-Received: <xmr:J-Q6ZfWsqCoMoHLWxO4qwyMV_umxqTRxVwTMtaIjMiuDeAEtZX_GWXJiGhbKQB_qIzCjbcHygaAJ-u1d1_ZsLSw1-bl4> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrleefgddtkecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrvghtvghr ucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepledvleelffdtudekudffjefgfeejueehieelfedtgfetudetgeegveeutefhjedt necuffhomhgrihhnpehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdho rhhg X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:J-Q6ZXgu9eHUJGef0irW5SNEFVrc88EyAAZSl-q82n0bwdVM_3bmVg> <xmx:J-Q6ZXBdCKBlPcU36fgSyfPMtbf7m0W_3UolCbUlKIy9R68T2_jrgg> <xmx:J-Q6ZQIFqWu1sfHvFzGRwZO2EzU--EQJD3bFP5tOwa93VL-jR4hISQ> <xmx:KOQ6ZS-aanxP5oJk0_NrXmXhS7JqgpBkGSxB760FAFjb3PfZlo2ptw> Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:11:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F416E5F97F; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:50 +0000 From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> To: Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laolu32@gmail.com>, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> Message-ID: <ZTrkJrqzBB0e9dXB@petertodd.org> References: <CANLPe+OQBsPiTrLEfz=SMxU8TkM_1XNfJQeq8gt2V6vDu=+Zxw@mail.gmail.com> <ZTaSwtvctmIiF74k@petertodd.org> <ZTawwRqGN4XUUu8C@camus> <5b641ddc-a30b-4dd7-2481-6d9cdb459359@dashjr.org> <CAO3Pvs_uUtCfhayU=3LCtpNGtkcDr=H0AM65bhNJcTMuBzWn_w@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <CAO3Pvs_uUtCfhayU=3LCtpNGtkcDr=H0AM65bhNJcTMuBzWn_w@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinals BIP PR X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:54 -0000 --bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 03:56:55PM -0700, Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-de= v wrote: > TL;DR: let's just use an automated system to assign BIP numbers, so we can > spend time on more impactful things. Yes, an easy way to do that is to use a mathematical function, like SHA256(= <bip contents>) or Pubkey(<bip author controlled secret key>). Of course, that's also silly, as we might as well use URLs at that point... > IIUC, one the primary roles of the dedicated BIP maintainers is just to h= and > out BIP numbers for documents. Supposedly with this privilege, the BIP > maintainer is able to tastefully assign related BIPs to consecutive numbe= rs, > and also reserve certain BIP number ranges for broad categories, like 3xx > for p2p changes (just an example). > > To my knowledge, the methodology for such BIP number selection isn't > published anywhere, and is mostly arbitrary. As motioned in this thread, > some perceive this manual process as a gatekeeping mechanism, and often > ascribe favoritism as the reason why PR X got a number immediately, but P= R Y > has waited N months w/o an answer. >=20 > Every few years we go through an episode where someone is rightfully upset > that they haven't been assigned a BIP number after following the requisite > process. Most recently, another BIP maintainer was appointed, with the h= ope > that the second maintainer would help to alleviate some of the subjective > load of the position. Fast forward to this email thread, and it doesn't > seem like adding more BIP maintainers will actually help with the issue of > BIP number assignment. >=20 > Instead, what if we just removed the subjective human element from the > process, and switched to using PR numbers to assign BIPs? Now instead of > attempting to track down a BIP maintainer at the end of a potentially > involved review+iteration period, PRs are assigned BIP numbers as soon as > they're opened and we have one less thing to bikeshed and gatekeep. >=20 > One down side of this is that assuming the policy is adopted, we'll sorta > sky rocket the BIP number space. At the time of writing of this email, the > next PR number looks to be 1508. That doesn't seem like a big deal to me, > but we could offset that by some value, starting at the highest currently > manually assigned BIP number. BIP numbers would no longer always be > contiguous, but that's sort of already the case. >=20 > There's also the matter of related BIPs, like the segwit series (BIPs 141, > 142, 143, 144, and 145). For these, we can use a suffix scheme to indicate > the BIP lineage. So if BIP 141 was the first PR, then BIP 142 was opened > later, the OP can declare the BIP 142 is BIP 141.2 or BIP 141-2. I don't > think it would be too difficult to find a workable scheme. At that point, why are we bothering with numbers at all? If BIP #'s aren't memorable, what is their purpose? Why not just let people publish ideas on their own web pages and figure out what we're going to call those ideas on a case-by-case basis. All this gets back to my original point: a functioning BIP system is *inherently* centralized and involves human gatekeepers who inevitably have= to apply standards to approve BIPs. You can't avoid this as long as you want a= BIP system. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE0RcYcKRzsEwFZ3N5Lly11TVRLzcFAmU65CQACgkQLly11TVR LzetLg//WoZmd48F+s3swzMFfIdsRtQNGvDggFKwVL77kOfJPPF2bSwUDi/V+GeC OLHuOSNwJqUL6jE9grHl9ROHV3r8d/o1taTtzlcixOouSnuCUK4lZ39eWwZTIYzx Jchc8+X2Qdgln+OQI7GQ28fIHgbnWhIYXnqYUWQfnWuA+S9rmwB/pwsZhk2aIItI ABCDBcJBQ5fjv/BCCumFJ30KNSCTIa2UfMQO5qMKN5pDkjZj80d/3oSy6EG7beVi sQM4IIw/lq7Ds7NHgtYhNHhP1HRRAm1Vwsk0Mb3PZ4CtNVbGio6KYnwOUzzmkkPn auZmgVbKRtAbPsQXHD7MiSJ075U8YSJGjMsEoy4dOOBPTags+5HijME5Sgl9YcWl TCFuJ47k26JnOh635d5mzFKLkJMtiX8xMb73gucziX0lK2h6FhhfDEVh1gMvLw8j O2bDNVeWsvietvJjsgK2dE5jQQnHNcnj/WrTaJNRZW0QI3Z7dYjH0MosI4Qdrs/9 B+lJGzGiSbLtNIhnIYBetjDaXyajxhW73cnzCbjoAtSVQ6LFguwzc7aW602ak0Og kjuhTPV9ZZkWVHPv7eCgAp92BvQmDYXgnhQ9LmgQmN10u3Ow8RYzo1iK6wzy0D9b rIGTEGBh37qXaxm12iemL4co54AZnLJNGqeyvGHVnNqIalPETEw= =7e1G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m--