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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <thomas@thomaszander.se>) id 1Xefpq-0004vG-Ld
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:50:58 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.141])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Xefpp-000520-77
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:50:58 +0000
Received: from [85.158.139.163:50443] by server-5.bemta-5.messagelabs.com id
5C/5E-11546-AD87F345; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:50:50 +0000
X-Env-Sender: thomas@thomaszander.se
X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-188.messagelabs.com!1413445849!7552546!1
X-Originating-IP: [83.145.56.68]
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 6.12.3; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 25304 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2014 07:50:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.infront.no) (83.145.56.68)
by server-12.tower-188.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP;
16 Oct 2014 07:50:50 -0000
Received: from SE8EX13-MBX04.osl.infront.as (10.234.180.16) by
SE8TMG.osl.infront.as (10.234.180.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
id 14.3.158.1; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:50:49 +0200
Received: from SE8EX13-CAS.osl.infront.as (10.234.180.10) by
SE8EX13-MBX04.osl.infront.as (10.234.180.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server
(TLS) id 15.0.775.38; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:50:49 +0200
Received: from debian.localnet (10.234.92.34) by SE8EX13-CAS.osl.infront.as
(10.234.180.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.775.38 via
Frontend Transport; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:50:49 +0200
From: Thomas Zander <thomas@thomaszander.se>
To: <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:50:48 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.0-4-486; KDE/4.8.4; i686; ; )
References: <CA+s+GJCAWXgpzyQnAar6ecKdcci+tdR8yJjCOUpB=xmj-ytZZQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgQRWAk6+ZvEaAX+Mp+_dtg9G_h8+tYxtZpVhu=Djb0k7A@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJCzBHGoBo8mcubbaavwR2HPave8GbA90+aGYgiJDKm=4g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJCzBHGoBo8mcubbaavwR2HPave8GbA90+aGYgiJDKm=4g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <201410160950.48809.thomas@thomaszander.se>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [195.245.231.141 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay
lines
X-Headers-End: 1Xefpp-000520-77
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process
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: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:50:58 -0000
On Wednesday 15. October 2014 11.36.58 Wladimir wrote:
> > We're also having problems with people failing to comment on things,
> > not even "I looked at this and have no opinion", which is really
> > obstructing things.
>
> Well - the only way to avoid that is to set a reasonable deadline,
> after which there is a default decision. You'd hope this would
> motivate people to get involved in time.
I have been part of both the OSI (NEN) and the OASIS standards committees for
a while, working on standards as a technical adviser.
There I learned a lot about how to manage this process, maybe some ideas from
such committees can be useful.
The idea that one person owns a BIP makes total sense, (s)he is the only one
that should be putting forward the BIP when its mature enough for making it
final. Note that this can be already after its been implemented once or twice.
So you have a phase where you have random people propose changes, which should
all go in the public mailinglist, and they can be accepted by the owner
without discussion.
If anyone that sees that change has an objection to the change, (s)he speaks
up and you follow group consensus. This means (and this is actually in an ISO
standard ;) that consensus is reached when nobody is left objecting to the
change.
At some point the BIP is mature enough to vote on, at the discretion of the
owner, and the owner puts it forward and requests a vote. If the above process
was handled cleanly there is a very small chance of it being down-voted so an
actual vote may not be needed (its hard to decide who gets a vote..).
You obviously need a deadline for this and afterwards you mark the proposal
final. Or you close it as "needs more work".
--
Thomas Zander
|
