MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Casey Rodarmor <casey@rodarmor.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 22:38:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CANLPe+OQBsPiTrLEfz=SMxU8TkM_1XNfJQeq8gt2V6vDu=+Zxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001a1e5506083365dc"
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinals BIP PR
Precedence: list

--0000000000001a1e5506083365dc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Dear List,

The Ordinals BIP PR has been sitting open for nine months now[0]. I've
commented a few times asking the BIP editors to let me know what is needed
for the BIP to either be merged or rejected. I've also reached out to the
BIP editors via DM and email, but haven't received a response.

There has been much misunderstanding of the nature of the BIP process.
BIPS, in particular informational BIPs, are a form of technical
documentation, and their acceptance does not indicate that they will be
included in any implementation, including Bitcoin Core, nor that they they
have consensus among the community.

Preexisting BIPs include hard-fork block size increases, hard-fork
proof-of-work changes, colored coin voting protocols, rejected soft fork
proposals, encouragement of address reuse, and drivechain.

I believe ordinals is in-scope for a BIP, and am hoping to get the PR
unstuck. I would appreciate feedback from the BIP editors on whether it is
in-scope for a BIP, if not, why not, and if so, what changes need to be
made for it to be accepted.

Best regards,
Casey Rodarmor

[0] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1408

--0000000000001a1e5506083365dc
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,he=
lvetica,sans-serif">Dear List,<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=
=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_d=
efault" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">The Ordinals BIP P=
R has been sitting open for nine months now[0]. I&#39;ve commented a few ti=
mes asking the BIP editors to let me know what is needed for the BIP to eit=
her be merged or rejected. I&#39;ve also reached out to the BIP editors via=
 DM and email, but haven&#39;t received a response.</div><div class=3D"gmai=
l_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div><div =
class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Th=
ere has been much misunderstanding of the nature of the BIP process. BIPS, =
in particular informational BIPs, are a form of technical documentation, an=
d their acceptance does not indicate that they will be included in any impl=
ementation, including Bitcoin Core, nor that they they have consensus among=
 the community.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:aria=
l,helvetica,sans-serif"><br>Preexisting BIPs include hard-fork block size i=
ncreases, hard-fork proof-of-work changes, colored coin voting protocols, r=
ejected soft fork proposals, encouragement of address reuse, and drivechain=
.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sa=
ns-serif"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial=
,helvetica,sans-serif">I believe ordinals is in-scope for a BIP, and am hop=
ing to get the PR unstuck. I would appreciate feedback from the BIP editors=
 on whether it is in-scope for a BIP, if not, why not, and if so, what chan=
ges need to be made for it to be accepted.</div><div class=3D"gmail_default=
" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div><div class=3D"=
gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Best regard=
s,</div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,s=
ans-serif">Casey Rodarmor<br><br>[0] <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/=
bips/pull/1408">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1408</a><br></div></di=
v>

--0000000000001a1e5506083365dc--