1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
|
Return-Path: <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B34C7C13
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 16 Mar 2016 20:43:32 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com (mail-lf0-f41.google.com
[209.85.215.41])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EC41177
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 16 Mar 2016 20:43:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lf0-f41.google.com with SMTP id l83so28290717lfd.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 16 Mar 2016 13:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=QrJAv1YMbBO5+nVPmo0R+xQs2i6EVSdJTcxbxqPfrXw=;
b=zCwS8q5ZZ1GvYyhXv5EAAlw/pEK7cfY2DSCSaI8NLA+4aHg39Nk7mR7zJ1xw+8QuqJ
qa6Gb2ZzN/si6G4iT2Zp/RKPDpexrqLp+SKIgVOtxbeOmYDJei2oPPHIGYY0phjIPTby
TOtt45x6cPoJ7k3Uzb+hmAHw1bb+ybKV0nSaSujntVan7r52WR9O9NLRdg/yTb9QsUGi
xEmoL1etrvXX+7PyJ1Q7qGpumAA2TOVay3mDOP1gRhcDSdiQHVm0Xc1m7VUjGkXRRMEb
7TNsOY9k2MWwiGY9C4G+IMZdOZ0x4VBb6ITfzArBWjmEGXbMwkle4iGIEpR0GOni57TP
oSeA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=QrJAv1YMbBO5+nVPmo0R+xQs2i6EVSdJTcxbxqPfrXw=;
b=P152pxTLKJTc3/CQQjk+gFHBWGB4YhNsdO3ZPtyroF7kImojMVBiPmNbtJAyi3////
Duu7zDs3YtHe4WWrBl0Lq2+o8QCpMVTKZVDSu7h+T9H3dRebvUONGyg+1OZDrjtTIGgW
RLR7bkuOzSON80X+i+RiU33IpZSqjNx0mieXPYT/X9DgOPj0CnZUs8GjuPNV/3TxRqCw
kJMhxRe64YQxKXbLH+s29tMvG7cQFrnNkD+gDi7aPHrCB1An8DP8z7uI6uCDAMvdkdJA
b4aoJyJ1ccn2I0M6BOTOLISsA9ZjRVdS0M0s4ELcG9Ag2TCuQtbBhZ4gtgc7fFN0yI0y
YFUA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLpJNNSjNEo4YSH396h76OLzC9mF5DQLrd8W6sA7Bgx0GGgIjKbAi3ZJnsBh0eVFGu/Glu5QB9Tkn8IyA==
X-Received: by 10.25.28.140 with SMTP id c134mr1743330lfc.99.1458161009647;
Wed, 16 Mar 2016 13:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.82.203 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 13:43:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201603081904.28687.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <201603081904.28687.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 20:43:09 +0000
Message-ID: <CADJgMzt1BUHo9_tVJF-LG_kkGdR88NVeqXaz9itLN21=R763Xw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11472c0001661f052e3091f4
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM,
HK_RANDOM_FROM,
HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 21:42:34 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 2 promotion to Final
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 20:43:32 -0000
--001a11472c0001661f052e3091f4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I have an objection about "BIP comments" in BIP2. I think BIPs should be
self contained, but the specification recommends posting comments to the
Bitcoin Wiki (bitcoin.it). I think this is a bad idea and external sources
are bound to go stale over time as can be evidenced by a number of existing
BIPs which link to external content that has long since expired. Comments
should be made instead using the Wiki feature at bitcoin/bips itself (which
can be enabled in the administration settings).
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> It has been about 1 month since BIP 2 finished receiving comments, so I
> believe it is an appropriate time to begin the process of moving it to
> Final
> Status. Toward this end, I have opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/350
>
> The current requirement for this is that "the reference implementation is
> complete and accepted by the community". Given the vagueness of this
> criteria,
> I intend to move forward applying BIP 2's more specific criteria to itself:
>
> > 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. Addressed or obstructive objections may
> be
> > ignored/overruled by general agreement that they have been sufficiently
> > addressed, but clear reasoning must be given in such circumstances.
>
> Furthermore, there is a reference implementation in the mentioned PR.
>
> Please review the latest draft BIP and provide any objections ASAP.
> If there are no outstanding objections on 2016 April 9th, I will consider
> the
> current draft to have reached rough consensus and update its Status to
> Final
> by merging the PR.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Luke
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--001a11472c0001661f052e3091f4
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I have an objection about "BIP comments" in=
BIP2. I think BIPs should be self contained, but the specification recomme=
nds posting comments to the Bitcoin Wiki (<a href=3D"http://bitcoin.it" tar=
get=3D"_blank">bitcoin.it</a>). I think this is a bad idea and external sou=
rces are bound to go stale over time as can be evidenced by a number of exi=
sting BIPs which link to external content that has long since expired. Comm=
ents should be made instead using the Wiki feature at bitcoin/bips itself (=
which can be enabled in the administration settings).=C2=A0</div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 7:04=
PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bi=
tcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.li=
nuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote=
" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color=
:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">It has been abo=
ut 1 month since BIP 2 finished receiving comments, so I<br>
believe it is an appropriate time to begin the process of moving it to Fina=
l<br>
Status. Toward this end, I have opened a pull request:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/350" rel=3D"n=
oreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/350</a><b=
r>
<br>
The current requirement for this is that "the reference implementation=
is<br>
complete and accepted by the community". Given the vagueness of this c=
riteria,<br>
I intend to move forward applying BIP 2's more specific criteria to its=
elf:<br>
<br>
> A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it achieves =
rough<br>
> consensus on the mailing list. Such a proposal is said to have rough<b=
r>
> consensus if it has been open to discussion on the development mailing=
list<br>
> for at least one month, and no person maintains any unaddressed<br>
> substantiated objections to it. Addressed or obstructive objections ma=
y be<br>
> ignored/overruled by general agreement that they have been sufficientl=
y<br>
> addressed, but clear reasoning must be given in such circumstances.<br=
>
<br>
Furthermore, there is a reference implementation in the mentioned PR.<br>
<br>
Please review the latest draft BIP and provide any objections ASAP.<br>
If there are no outstanding objections on 2016 April 9th, I will consider t=
he<br>
current draft to have reached rough consensus and update its Status to Fina=
l<br>
by merging the PR.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Luke<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--001a11472c0001661f052e3091f4--
|
