Return-Path: <john@johnnewbery.com> Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A533C000B for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:34:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160874047A for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:34:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=johnnewbery-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com 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 KVD0ESezQnuv for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:34:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::231]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A19040466 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:34:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id b38so26621127ljf.5 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:34:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=johnnewbery-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=0qsDglacmcngKOffhuvbT111+47Y9QVt7yGNPVSpru4=; b=IWAQ4Bko2m6cuQZFBCv6yloCVGHZuzZqebVF3p8HOj3KhYRjuYRSZuULA9aj0rAFRV GY8JQtFjkafOjbKlvvUONe919wg4PR5HLwehq36zEgzn1++YK3HYoZpShGb/xYaUq9D9 kYgnuu9Y6nQh0EYUtR2cs3n7V93dOHMJfqny9ZeJu5No/Fa1uERGZ4AW6BOQH/msn0b2 6tSf611G56zlv3SQdfKZgFlqUTd6dWDOhXj5dkdAtI1Znm93GhXO6KQcbHqtmlqTeeei 1beC2g4+l1Hlyt7t8jXoNn9g5agK9AM5iflR9rnO8gy1TFFnbWKE/uuS9iafEgywTIlG Dj9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=0qsDglacmcngKOffhuvbT111+47Y9QVt7yGNPVSpru4=; b=Dx/8r21Nw2SXeuBFPIpSPskXjGTksLbjO83gL+xANbMF+tQwhCg/RsUnnKnXWErYFe qv71VLdb7BPOTGuBuFnpAvdphP+8xqBM0rctmUdeq4/L7nwfnv1xYCzO6W/J3NxvidHw 6rs6thUsHaWfPMSiF0KPGhOqlm9zUhUtJbm9Tq/kHDCD3ScNLxWAH0CsYgjKPLc64fNv JAvX/W8IbOt3rL671xUt888uUZEfJZBX1XvPIrMZxAqRGNwlw6NAH2djBtJ0d65GJMSA dA6C8waJO3mVVz0K9U8qbq/+6Z6phslOQCA0xcRBl35eXyaJUCUIMYqsI9RnnwgX5HIn Uw8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530bDSUqQGqniDzDJBZOrn9EP5dKd9DazMeuT+8GnVXJJEadWEYx NfbHUHwlij+/g08HoQjx/jAvTCsMKkaUDtb9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyFNA3DsXyVTTHfs2sby58eulsAUL7PQpbmOdRUTC76oobvAXRG4q6lTZ+lyLtv6FYVCts8OA== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a3d2:: with SMTP id w18mr16097074lje.457.1619523239985; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:33:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-f46.google.com (mail-lf1-f46.google.com. [209.85.167.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w23sm1740454lfu.132.2021.04.27.04.33.59 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:33:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f46.google.com with SMTP id j4so53709646lfp.0 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:33:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a19:4185:: with SMTP id o127mr2912705lfa.301.1619523239113; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:33:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202104230209.05373.luke@dashjr.org> <202104252100.07296.luke@dashjr.org> <40214e32-ffb3-9518-7bc8-9c1059f50da7@mattcorallo.com> <202104252122.40909.luke@dashjr.org> <248f871e-1b83-8c7c-678b-3ed0585a6357@mattcorallo.com> <20210426194309.2k5exujz23vjrgwc@ganymede> In-Reply-To: <20210426194309.2k5exujz23vjrgwc@ganymede> From: John Newbery <john@johnnewbery.com> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 12:33:48 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAFmfg2uDiEAFHom8Bh4mjr_in3dpk++j+yfgHY3+gStU1Bii5A@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <CAFmfg2uDiEAFHom8Bh4mjr_in3dpk++j+yfgHY3+gStU1Bii5A@mail.gmail.com> To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005f77c105c0f2a35d" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 12:05:53 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Reminder on the Purpose of BIPs X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:34:06 -0000 --0000000000005f77c105c0f2a35d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" ACK. These seem like very reasonable next steps. On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 8:43 PM David A. Harding via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 05:31:50PM -0400, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > > In general, I think its time we all agree the BIP process has simply > failed > > and move on. Luckily its not really all that critical and proposed > protocol > > documents can be placed nearly anywhere with the same effect. > > I recommend: > > 1. We add additional BIP editors, starting with Kalle Alm (if there are > no continuing significant objections). > > 2. We seek Luke Dashjr's resignation as BIPs editor. > > 3. We begin treating protocol documents outside the BIPs repository as > first-class BIP documentation. > > The first recommendation permits continued maintenance of existing BIPs > plus gives the additional maintainers an opportunity to rebuild the > credibility of the repository. > > The second recommendation addresses the dissatisfaction of many BIP > authors and potential authors with the current editor, which I think > will discourage many of them from making additional significant > contributions to the repository. It also seems to me to be a better use > of Luke's talents and interests for him to focus on protocol research > and review rather than procedurally checking whether a bunch of > documents are well formed. > > The third recommendation provides an escape hatch for anyone, such as > Matt, who currently thinks the process has failed, or for anyone who > comes to that same conclusion in the future under a different editing > team. My specific recommendations there are: > > a. Anyone writing protocol documentation in the spirit of the BIP > process can post their idea to this mailing list like we've always > done and, when they've finished collecting initial feedback, they can > assign themselves a unique decentralized identifier starting with > "bip-". They may also define a shorter alias that they encourage > people to use in cases where the correct document can be inferred > from context. E.g., > > bip-wuille-taproot (bip-taproot) > bip-towns-versionbits-min-activation-height (bip-vbmah) > bip-todd-harding-opt-in-replace-by-fee (bip-opt-in-rbf) > > b. The author then publishes the document to any place they'd like, > although > they are strongly encouraged to make any document source available > under an open license to ensure others can create their own > modifications. > > c. Implementations of BIPs, whether original repository BIPs or > decentralized BIPs, link to the BIPs they implement to ensure > researchers and developers can find the relevant protocol > documentation. E.g., > > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/fe5e495c31de47b0ec732b943db11fe345d874af/doc/bips.md > > (It may also be advisable for implementations to mirror copies of > the BIPs they implement so later modifications to the document > don't confuse anyone. For this reason, extremely liberal > licensing of BIP documents is encouraged.) > > d. To help maintain quality and consistency between documentation, the > BIP editors provide a BIP document template, guidelines similar to > the existing BIP2, and an easy-to-run format linter. > > I think this decentralized BIPs alternative also helps address some > longstanding problems with the BIPs system: that many casual Bitcoin > users and developers think of documents in the BIPs repo as > authoritative and that there are some development teams (such as for LN) > that have already abandoned the BIPs process because, in part, they want > complete control over their own documentation. > > The recommendations above were developed based on conversations I had > with a few stakeholders in the BIPs process, but I did not attempt a > comprehensive survey and I certainly don't claim to speak for anyone > else. I hope the recommendations are satisfactory and I look forward to > your feedback. > > Thanks, > > -Dave > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --0000000000005f77c105c0f2a35d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>ACK. These seem like very reasonable= next=C2=A0steps.</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr= " class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 8:43 PM David A. Harding via= bitcoin-dev <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">b= itcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote cl= ass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid= rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 05:31:50PM -040= 0, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br> > In general, I think its time we all agree the BIP process has simply f= ailed<br> > and move on. Luckily its not really all that critical and proposed pro= tocol<br> > documents can be placed nearly anywhere with the same effect.<br> <br> I recommend:<br> <br> 1. We add additional BIP editors, starting with Kalle Alm (if there are<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0no continuing significant objections).<br> <br> 2. We seek Luke Dashjr's resignation as BIPs editor.<br> <br> 3. We begin treating protocol documents outside the BIPs repository as<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0first-class BIP documentation.<br> <br> The first recommendation permits continued maintenance of existing BIPs<br> plus gives the additional maintainers an opportunity to rebuild the<br> credibility of the repository.<br> <br> The second recommendation addresses the dissatisfaction of many BIP<br> authors and potential authors with the current editor, which I think<br> will discourage many of them from making additional significant<br> contributions to the repository.=C2=A0 It also seems to me to be a better u= se<br> of Luke's talents and interests for him to focus on protocol research<b= r> and review rather than procedurally checking whether a bunch of<br> documents are well formed.<br> <br> The third recommendation provides an escape hatch for anyone, such as<br> Matt, who currently thinks the process has failed, or for anyone who<br> comes to that same conclusion in the future under a different editing<br> team.=C2=A0 My specific recommendations there are:<br> <br> a. Anyone writing protocol documentation in the spirit of the BIP<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0process can post their idea to this mailing list like we'v= e always<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0done and, when they've finished collecting initial feedbac= k, they can<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0assign themselves a unique decentralized identifier starting w= ith<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0"bip-".=C2=A0 They may also define a shorter alias t= hat they encourage<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0people to use in cases where the correct document can be infer= red<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0from context.=C2=A0 E.g.,<br> <br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 bip-wuille-taproot (bip-taproot)<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 bip-towns-versionbits-min-activation-height (bip-vbmah= )<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 bip-todd-harding-opt-in-replace-by-fee (bip-opt-in-rbf= )<br> <br> b. The author then publishes the document to any place they'd like, alt= hough<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0they are strongly encouraged to make any document source avail= able<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0under an open license to ensure others can create their own<br= > =C2=A0 =C2=A0modifications.<br> <br> c. Implementations of BIPs, whether original repository BIPs or<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0decentralized BIPs, link to the BIPs they implement to ensure<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0researchers and developers can find the relevant protocol<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0documentation.=C2=A0 E.g.,<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/fe5e495c31d= e47b0ec732b943db11fe345d874af/doc/bips.md" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_bl= ank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/fe5e495c31de47b0ec732b943db11f= e345d874af/doc/bips.md</a><br> <br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(It may also be advisable for implementations to mirror= copies of<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0the BIPs they implement so later modifications to the d= ocument<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0don't confuse anyone.=C2=A0 For this reason, extrem= ely liberal<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0licensing of BIP documents is encouraged.)<br> <br> d. To help maintain quality and consistency between documentation, the<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0BIP editors provide a BIP document template, guidelines simila= r to<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0the existing BIP2, and an easy-to-run format linter.<br> <br> I think this decentralized BIPs alternative also helps address some<br> longstanding problems with the BIPs system: that many casual Bitcoin<br> users and developers think of documents in the BIPs repo as<br> authoritative and that there are some development teams (such as for LN)<br= > that have already abandoned the BIPs process because, in part, they want<br= > complete control over their own documentation.=C2=A0 <br> <br> The recommendations above were developed based on conversations I had<br> with a few stakeholders in the BIPs process, but I did not attempt a<br> comprehensive survey and I certainly don't claim to speak for anyone<br= > else.=C2=A0 I hope the recommendations are satisfactory and I look forward = to<br> your feedback.<br> <br> Thanks,<br> <br> -Dave<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></div> --0000000000005f77c105c0f2a35d--