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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>) id 1VYLJO-0006i3-JI
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 21 Oct 2013 19:38:46 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of me.com
designates 17.172.220.240 as permitted sender)
client-ip=17.172.220.240; envelope-from=jeanpaulkogelman@me.com;
helo=st11p02mm-asmtp005.mac.com;
Received: from st11p02mm-asmtp005.mac.com ([17.172.220.240])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1VYLJL-00022E-5o for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 21 Oct 2013 19:38:46 +0000
Received: from st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com ([17.172.220.247])
by st11p02mm-asmtp005.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit
(built Aug
22 2013)) with ESMTP id <0MV100215AKAA230@st11p02mm-asmtp005.mac.com>
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon,
21 Oct 2013 19:38:37 +0000 (GMT)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure
engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794,1.0.431,0.0.0000
definitions=2013-10-21_03:2013-10-21, 2013-10-21,
1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0
suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam
adjust=0
reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1308280000
definitions=main-1310210090
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_043epgLw8I2YeLvakBO2GA)"
Received: from localhost ([17.172.220.223]) by st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit
(built Aug
22 2013)) with ESMTP id <0MV100G22AKC1AA0@st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com>;
Mon, 21 Oct 2013 19:38:36 +0000 (GMT)
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
From: Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 19:38:37 +0000 (GMT)
X-Mailer: iCloud MailClient1T.111546 MailServer1T
X-Originating-IP: [159.153.138.53]
Message-id: <791a727f-2188-4848-bd77-ea733c8c5c2c@me.com>
In-reply-to: <CAJHLa0OOY30z96d7VgfD3fTznC=WK7+ZH6k8vr-DVNkqbGHtxA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
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: bitpay.com]
X-Headers-End: 1VYLJL-00022E-5o
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [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: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 19:38:46 -0000
--Boundary_(ID_043epgLw8I2YeLvakBO2GA)
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
I have some more questions.
1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)?
2) Should the current wiki pages be taken down / forwarded to the git repo or be auto updated from the git repo?
3) Even though the information in BIP 50 is valuable, should it really be considered a BIP?
On Oct 21, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
The goal is to improve the process, hash-seal our specs, and create an
easy way for anyone with at least an email address to participate.
--Boundary_(ID_043epgLw8I2YeLvakBO2GA)
Content-type: multipart/related;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_bzgVixbHch7B//sdd0HxAA)"; type="text/html"
--Boundary_(ID_bzgVixbHch7B//sdd0HxAA)
Content-type: text/html; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
<html><body><div><br></div><div>I have some more questions.</div><div><br></div><div>1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)?</div><div><br></div><div>2) Should the current wiki pages be taken down / forwarded to the git repo or be auto updated from the git repo?</div><div><br></div><div>3) Even though the information in BIP 50 is valuable, should it really be considered a BIP?<br><br>On Oct 21, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:<br></div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div class="msg-quote"><div class="_stretch">The goal is to improve the process, hash-seal our specs, and create an<br> easy way for anyone with at least an email address to participate.<br></div></div></blockquote></div></body></html>
--Boundary_(ID_bzgVixbHch7B//sdd0HxAA)--
--Boundary_(ID_043epgLw8I2YeLvakBO2GA)--
|
