Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49243C0037 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:47:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23595408D8 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:47:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 23595408D8 Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=Qax4bkSL X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 GkielEqpmAU8 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:47:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-0201.mail-europe.com (mail-0201.mail-europe.com [51.77.79.158]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3A0F4064F for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:47:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org F3A0F4064F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1705596457; x=1705855657; bh=wWqAPRCrbHaPfytR+PjS0DAcLV3G4bjGUK9KomiWPj8=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=Qax4bkSLFjVYvqJbgzhbP1z+0/Pms4GYo3djIqUTnjO2Z0ClufWCFA8LSMaP8OlBk R9RnVzF2rR779Midqovdx4Yw2b1xjZ+yK9P0yWtugdVYLVVc9s81783hJE3BGBjTBC UcaZt2jn1/bDbbCsqg+7p1XeIgq8xcmyMfDcSa+159QV9TUT/L0xi/SeSITYsBCaHf 65797nGn07cLVZRTumGPbKPRCQ5eDnlOHvAZ4uLgSZl+07laDiHT7oIx426Ex3PyJy /HtvsaLbKUaZH6WCLlMjWpbIWS8OAkhdREjT+dhP3trfulrYe4GkpOZ3FTU6ITpPsD xpAiM5TG/scRA== Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:47:33 +0000 To: Anthony Towns From: alicexbt Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Feedback-ID: 40602938:user:proton MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 17:06:25 +0000 Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP process friction 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: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:47:49 -0000 Hi AJ, I like the idea and agree with everything you shared in the email except on= e thing: > So I'm switching inquisition over to having a dedicated "IANA"-ish > thing that's independent of BIP process nonsense. It's at: >=20 > * https://github.com/bitcoin-inquisition/binana I think "authority" is a strong word especially in bitcoin and this process= could even work with BINN (Bitcoin Inquisition Numbers And Names). IANA (a= function of ICANN) is different thing altogether which was founded by US g= overnment. /dev/fd0 floppy disk guy Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Wednesday, January 17th, 2024 at 2:42 AM, Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev = wrote: > Hi all, >=20 > Just under three years ago there was some discussion about the BIPs repo, > with the result that Kalle became a BIPs editor in addition to Luke, eg: >=20 > * https://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/2021-04-22.log > * https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-April/0188= 59.html >=20 > It remains, however, quite hard to get BIPs merged into the repo, eg > the following PRs have been open for quite some time: >=20 > * #1408: Ordinal Numbers; opened 2023-01-21, editors comments: > Kalle: > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1408#issuecomment-1421641390 > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1408#issuecomment-1435389476 >=20 > Luke: > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1408#issuecomment-1429146796 > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1408#issuecomment-1438831607 > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1408#issuecomment-1465016571 >=20 > * #1489: Taproot Assets Protocol; opened 2023-09-07, editors comments: > Kalle: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1489#issuecomment-1855079626 > Luke: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1489#issuecomment-1869721535j >=20 > * #1500: OP_TXHASH; opened 2023-09-30, editors comments: > Luke: > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1500#pullrequestreview-1796550166 > https://twitter.com/LukeDashjr/status/1735701932520382839 >=20 > The range of acceptable BIPs seems to also be becoming more limited, > such that mempool/relay policy is out of scope: >=20 > * https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1524#issuecomment-1869734387 >=20 > Despite having two editors, only Luke seems to be able to assign new > numbers to BIPs, eg: >=20 > * https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1458#issuecomment-1597917780 >=20 > There's also been some not very productive delays due to the editors > wanting backwards compatibility sections even if authors don't think > that's necessary, eg: >=20 > * https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1372#issuecomment-1439132867 >=20 > Even working out whether to go back to allowing markdown as a text format > is a multi-month slog due to process confusion: >=20 > * https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1504 >=20 > Anyway, while it's not totally dysfunctional, it's very high friction. >=20 > There are a variety of recent proposals that have PRs open against > inquisition; up until now I've been suggesting people write a BIP, and > have been keying off the BIP number to signal activation. But that just > seems to be introducing friction, when all I need is a way of linking > an arbitrary number to a spec. >=20 > So I'm switching inquisition over to having a dedicated "IANA"-ish > thing that's independent of BIP process nonsense. It's at: >=20 > * https://github.com/bitcoin-inquisition/binana >=20 > If people want to use it for bitcoin-related proposals that don't have > anything to do with inquisition, that's fine; I'm intending to apply the > policies I think the BIPs repo should be using, so feel free to open a PR= , > even if you already know I think your idea is BS on its merits. If someon= e > wants to write an automatic-merge-bot for me, that'd also be great. >=20 > If someone wants to reform the BIPs repo itself so it works better, > that'd be even better, but I'm not volunteering for that fight. >=20 > Cheers, > aj >=20 > (It's called "numbers and names" primarily because that way the acronym > amuses me, but also in case inquisition eventually needs an authoritative > dictionary for what "cat" or "txhash" or similar terms refer to) > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev