MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <202104230209.05373.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <202104230209.05373.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Pindar Wong <pindar.wong@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 15:50:53 +0800
Message-ID: <CAM7BtUq=TSo18di_i=cQLm3G3as4B6=hvfREKi8DOEEDyvmF7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e3d3c405c09f0e2b"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP editor: Kalle Alm
Precedence: list

--000000000000e3d3c405c09f0e2b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

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 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
> > 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
>

--000000000000e3d3c405c09f0e2b
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<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">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfound=
ation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding=
-left:1ex">Unless there are objections, I intend to add Kalle 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">=
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>

--000000000000e3d3c405c09f0e2b--