Message-ID: <52661DB7.7040805@250bpm.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:39:51 +0200
From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@250bpm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>, bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <791a727f-2188-4848-bd77-ea733c8c5c2c@me.com>
	<201310211947.59640.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <201310211947.59640.luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal
Precedence: list

On 21/10/13 21:47, Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Monday, October 21, 2013 7:38:37 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:
>> 1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)?
>
> Probably wouldn't hurt, but it'd likely need a rewrite in a more modular and
> formal form.

I wanted to have a look at how the whole Bitcoin thing works recently. 
Being a distributed application, I've searched for the protocol spec. 
What I found were two wiki pages (Protocol & ProtocolRules) that looked 
more like notes someone wrote down while implementing the application.

Have I missed something? Is there any effort underway trying to produce 
a decent spec? If not so, I am willing to help with that.

Martin