From: Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary=Apple-Mail-2FDBFBB4-04A8-40CB-9A96-58A6442B3175
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
MIME-version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:00:35 -0700
Message-id: <04038964-659F-4105-B086-8C0AB9FF765C@me.com>
References: <201709271856.27376.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CABaSBaz=pMfTz2UF-WpyxrkGY9XZO+zTHR7-Oie79J1Ap10hpQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<965940AD-A698-4B5F-9909-105E8A32B398@sprovoost.nl>
In-reply-to: <965940AD-A698-4B5F-9909-105E8A32B398@sprovoost.nl>
To: Sjors Provoost <sjors@sprovoost.nl>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Revising BIP 2 to expand editorial authority
Precedence: list


--Apple-Mail-2FDBFBB4-04A8-40CB-9A96-58A6442B3175
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Perhaps having authors consent to certain types of changes when they submit t=
heir BIP?


> On Sep 27, 2017, at 1:20 PM, Sjors Provoost via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@l=
ists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>> Op 27 sep. 2017, om 22:01 heeft Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev=
@lists.linuxfoundation.org> het volgende geschreven:
>>=20
>>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-de=
v@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> What do people think about modifying BIP 2 to allow editors to merge the=
se
>>> kinds of changes without involving the Authors? Strictly speaking, BIP 2=

>>> shouldn't be changed now that it is Active, but for such a minor revisio=
n, I
>>> think an exception is reasonable.
>>=20
>> Even minor revisions can not change the meaning of text. Changing a singl=
e word can often have a strange impact on the meaning of the text. There sho=
uld be some amount of care exercised here. Maybe it would be okay as long as=
 edits are mentioned in the changelog at the bottom of each document, or men=
tion that the primary authors have not reviewed suggested changes, or someth=
ing as much; otherwise the reader might not be aware to check revision histo=
ry to see what's going on.
>=20
> Perhaps it's enough to @mention authors in the PR and give them a week to o=
bject before merging?
>=20
> Sjors
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--Apple-Mail-2FDBFBB4-04A8-40CB-9A96-58A6442B3175
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3D=
utf-8"></head><body dir=3D"auto">Perhaps having authors consent to certain t=
ypes of changes when they submit their BIP?<br><br><div><br>On Sep 27, 2017,=
 at 1:20 PM, Sjors Provoost via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-de=
v@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; w=
rote:<br><br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div><meta http-equiv=3D"Conten=
t-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"><br class=3D""><div>Op 27 s=
ep. 2017, om 22:01 heeft Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" class=3D"">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfou=
ndation.org</a>&gt; het volgende geschreven:<br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D=
"cite" class=3D""><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D""><d=
iv dir=3D"ltr" class=3D""><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D=
"ltr" class=3D"">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org=
" target=3D"_blank" class=3D"">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;=
</span> wrote:<br class=3D""><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"marg=
in:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">What do people th=
ink about modifying BIP 2 to allow editors to merge these<br class=3D"">
kinds of changes without involving the Authors? Strictly speaking, BIP 2<br c=
lass=3D"">
shouldn't be changed now that it is Active, but for such a minor revision, I=
<br class=3D"">
think an exception is reasonable.<br class=3D""></blockquote><div class=3D""=
><br class=3D"">Even minor revisions can not change the meaning of text. Cha=
nging a single word can often have a strange impact on the meaning of the te=
xt. There should be some amount of care exercised here. Maybe it would be ok=
ay as long as edits are mentioned in the changelog at the bottom of each doc=
ument, or mention that the primary authors have not reviewed suggested chang=
es, or something as much; otherwise the reader might not be aware to check r=
evision history to see what's going on.<br class=3D""></div></div></div></di=
v></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""><div class=3D"">Perhaps it's enoug=
h to @mention authors in the PR and give them a week to object before mergin=
g?</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Sjors</div></di=
v></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div><span>________________________=
_______________________</span><br><span>bitcoin-dev mailing list</span><br><=
span><a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@li=
sts.linuxfoundation.org</a></span><br><span><a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfo=
undation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html=
>=

--Apple-Mail-2FDBFBB4-04A8-40CB-9A96-58A6442B3175--