Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88A91C000B for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63807400D0 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:12:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.789 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.789 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=ericmartindale.com Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yGwFG4aJlnuw for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:11:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail.verit.ae (mail.verit.ae [213.239.212.102]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33ED4400BD for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:11:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from authenticated-user (mail.verit.ae [213.239.212.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.verit.ae (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EBAA100AA5 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 11:11:55 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ericmartindale.com; s=mail; t=1619169115; bh=+npxXOfAb2LFV2qJKKl+JYKbznVh4afWaCU02oEx5ro=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=uoT9OzXIwvrtAq1ikeqYO7py2N5Apa2MJJT9OYXSFf3DGa78obYS486u8yStzDr6i uBaAhx8gw+8MAjdfWCCdUAIxJCgB3hyDI1DJYIL9z4yQku8Bn9Ig3TyAxfpcle7zoF dn887TSYvwSh6VDfQv5fCYOCKARO4jgwxA3ieDwHPKrkw1gelCfvvmc5QSHva5IUNL JeaonpYibGDHqx9LxqGS/3AbUSz/3dSI/5XoJDkISu6MeZoZBdH+h5q070tfjvg93W tNJoPoJ/uLA8LnY+Jhc8E0PlGw5r8uf5bdjl8bfhlYD0k3Y3obGA9bZ1wx/ji6Bru9 Bhm9epus+S7XQ== Received: from authenticated-user (mail.verit.ae [213.239.212.102]) for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 02:11:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533FEihYbZhv6raYNH6MhZHdwmSGNwZ5O7oDpqnhYpDyik0B1Ms0 M9O2Z8/eotHDyWZQWFvNS3T3erhOXlrdL0gwx5Q= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxIHCIqvBjfN9fJjGBJQqlLh5M4hwMXG6lu+GePZgAHCixDx2aBx6ZQQ/PseLRs5MY5dNhqhxDlJ+y1Jkg9WOg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1698:: with SMTP id a24mr3298275edv.62.1619169114459; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 02:11:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202104230209.05373.luke@dashjr.org> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Martindale Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:11:41 -0400 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Pindar Wong , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e617f305c0a02f1d" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:44:20 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP editor: Kalle Alm X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:12:00 -0000 --000000000000e617f305c0a02f1d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ACK. Kalle has been exceptional throughout his contributions =E2=80=94 esp= ecially thankful for btcdeb =F0=9F=99=8F On Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 3:51 AM Pindar Wong via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > ACK. > > p. > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:09 AM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Unless there are objections, I intend to add Kalle Alm as a BIP editor t= o >> assist in merging PRs into the bips git repo. >> >> Since there is no explicit process to adding BIP editors, IMO it should >> be >> fine to use BIP 2's Process BIP progression: >> >> > A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it achieves >> > rough consensus on the mailing list. Such a proposal is said to have >> > rough consensus if it has been open to discussion on the development >> > mailing list for at least one month, and no person maintains any >> > unaddressed substantiated objections to it. >> >> A Process BIP could be opened for each new editor, but IMO that is >> unnecessary. If anyone feels there is a need for a new Process BIP, we >> can go >> that route, but there is prior precedent for BIP editors appointing new >> BIP >> editors, so I think this should be fine. >> >> Please speak up soon if you disagree. >> >> Luke >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --000000000000e617f305c0a02f1d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
ACK.=C2=A0 Kalle has been exceptional throughout his= contributions =E2=80=94 especially thankful for btcdeb =F0=9F=99=8F
On Fri, A= pr 23, 2021, 3:51 AM Pindar Wong via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

On Fri, Apr 23, 2021= at 10:09 AM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev= @lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Unless there are objections, I intend to add Kall= e Alm as a BIP editor to
assist in merging PRs into the bips git repo.

Since there is no explicit process to adding BIP editors, IMO it should be =
fine to use BIP 2's Process BIP progression:

> A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it achieves<= br> > rough consensus on the mailing list. Such a proposal is said to have > rough consensus if it has been open to discussion on the development > mailing list for at least one month, and no person maintains any
> unaddressed substantiated objections to it.

A Process BIP could be opened for each new editor, but IMO that is
unnecessary. If anyone feels there is a need for a new Process BIP, we can = go
that route, but there is prior precedent for BIP editors appointing new BIP=
editors, so I think this should be fine.

Please speak up soon if you disagree.

Luke
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundati= on.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundati= on.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--000000000000e617f305c0a02f1d--