Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VYGV3-00052I-UK for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:30:29 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.212.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.169; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-wi0-f169.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com ([209.85.212.169]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VYGV2-00077z-Ra for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:30:29 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id cb5so5277333wib.0 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 07:30:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=gd2iSlkBcRqF5P7JIWde75NkpfDuDt55wuxTTGN9Ut0=; b=mi59p0RuvRB0uD8cWY4DnvHe72ONodrZMQ7ciB5PS2WM0z0zrn8ciJ99rKaDuxqeCH Yqasp6aNeCXFbuj9BwleTQ9jLL6rjclM3BK6nLg5UGnZVuqxmHZrMPIj/ee4AYs9oGXx K50vc2OfImzsD/GSwwMHMsKkHxWvml2/1mBav19qPV0J+CyGCm1UUVcqOZy8QKpvSF8j 1WPL64g/Aa/Qf5tHwN23JufpMcxHOaMIhJtrmkOzgS4JKC9PsSFA13ZgrzYEX655nDBh TTwHUkKCX6gJq+ntnD+/V0Szh1J83+5EURfxZ8fxKuZ+L6LhvTrHzVdMQFWUVGJDhSxi N5nQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQliA9VMOyKjPAzVONJN5uscc4ZYnkbFawb0XojpuMmV8QaztoJyy0vXT0dX8fDDkxHHt2Ns MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.174.36 with SMTP id bp4mr13660215wjc.7.1382365822574; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 07:30:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.164.164 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 07:30:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 10:30:22 -0400 Message-ID: From: Jeff Garzik To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: github.com] -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1VYGV2-00077z-Ra Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:30:30 -0000 This summarizes some rambling on IRC about revising the BIPS process. Right now, the BIPS process is a bit haphazard. Previously, BIPS were in a git repo, and the BIPS on the wiki were locked against editing. The BIPS editor at the time started off well, but was eventually M.I.A. So the BIPS "home" moved de facto to where everyone was reading them anyway, the wiki. They were made editable, and it became easier to Just Pick A Number And Write One. However, this inevitably became a bit disorganized. Further, there was a recent incident -- easily reverted -- where someone hopped on the wiki and started arbitrarily editing an existing standard. BIPs need to move back to git, in my opinion. Standards should be hash-sealed against corruption. Anything less would be uncivilized, and un-bitcoin. However, many on IRC pointed out requiring a git pull request might be a burdensome process, and discourage some contributors. The following is a sketch of an improved process. 1) BIP Draft. Modelled after IETF drafts. Anybody may submit a BIP draft, as long as it meets two very loose requirements: * At least somewhat related to bitcoin. Note, I did not say "crypto-currency". * Formatted similarly to existing BIPs (i.e. markdown, or whatever the community prefers) BIP drafts may be submitted via git pull request, or by emailing an attachment to bips.editor@bitcoin.org. This mirrors the Linux kernel change submission process: git is preferred, but there is always a non-git method for folks who cannot or do not wish to use git or github. BIP drafts are stored in git://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git/drafts/ and are not automatically assigned a BIPS number. 2) Time passes. Software for BIP drafts is developed, tested, published, and publicly discussed in a typical open source manner. 3) If interest and use cases remain strong, a BIP number may be requested, and the BIP draft is moved to git://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git main directory. 4) If there is general consensus that the BIP should be adopted, the BIP status is changed to "accepted." There are no specified time limits. Sometimes consensus about a BIP is reached in days, sometimes 12+ months or more. It varies widely depending on the feature's complexity and impact. As with the IETF, it will be q -- Jeff Garzik Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/