MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <202104230209.05373.luke@dashjr.org>
 <CAM7BtUq=TSo18di_i=cQLm3G3as4B6=hvfREKi8DOEEDyvmF7A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAM7BtUq=TSo18di_i=cQLm3G3as4B6=hvfREKi8DOEEDyvmF7A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Martindale <eric@ericmartindale.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:11:41 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAf19WpOBvWwk71uP6+b8swZZ3YsEvLd++bOxwf0xyhmPcvqAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pindar Wong <pindar.wong@gmail.com>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e617f305c0a02f1d"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP editor: Kalle Alm
Precedence: list

--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

<div dir=3D"auto"><div>ACK.=C2=A0 Kalle has been exceptional throughout his=
 contributions =E2=80=94 especially thankful for btcdeb =F0=9F=99=8F<br><br=
><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, A=
pr 23, 2021, 3:51 AM Pindar Wong via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitc=
oin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a=
>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0=
 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>=
ACK.</div><div><br></div><div>p.</div><div><br></div></div><br><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Apr 23, 2021=
 at 10:09 AM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@=
lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">bitcoin-dev=
@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gma=
il_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,2=
04,204);padding-left:1ex">Unless there are objections, I intend to add Kall=
e Alm as a BIP editor to <br>
assist in merging PRs into the bips git repo.<br>
<br>
Since there is no explicit process to adding BIP editors, IMO it should be =
<br>
fine to use BIP 2&#39;s Process BIP progression:<br>
<br>
&gt; A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it achieves<=
br>
&gt; rough consensus on the mailing list. Such a proposal is said to have<b=
r>
&gt; rough consensus if it has been open to discussion on the development<b=
r>
&gt; mailing list for at least one month, and no person maintains any<br>
&gt; unaddressed substantiated objections to it.<br>
<br>
A Process BIP could be opened for each new editor, but IMO that is <br>
unnecessary. If anyone feels there is a need for a new Process BIP, we can =
go <br>
that route, but there is prior precedent for BIP editors appointing new BIP=
 <br>
editors, so I think this should be fine.<br>
<br>
Please speak up soon if you disagree.<br>
<br>
Luke<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank" =
rel=3D"noreferrer">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundati=
on.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank" =
rel=3D"noreferrer">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundati=
on.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>

--000000000000e617f305c0a02f1d--