Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VioYv-0004eE-UM for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:54:05 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of zikula.org designates 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.54; envelope-from=drak@zikula.org; helo=mail-wg0-f54.google.com; Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com ([74.125.82.54]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VioYv-0006yr-23 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:54:05 +0000 Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id y10so7947531wgg.33 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 08:53:58 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=uBbe1GROWUVnPBBxlQ8mVPKvKpi5d1uA+11HfhzdfBI=; b=Qg9PfR1SKrPPGqqR2kYN4NmyMPXD9lv/RRD1wYxTgdx5ENZMZ0uPYhCORb5IL3HW2q 6Y1X59ItWBoR0fkS6G66tKdX7Ti3zAG6KNVEnPUWKlVllg276LQMQ/fPJjDW2sY44SjE QmviQCfE7m5ADXJwPNlCZTyJprTe+Z91YM5+2j/96OuzqV1rZFeKDXjdoVc0uTwIdbJ+ mm040TiYRCdGysxM323zORQiwGn0kOHfcW9LCkIDMNlaCNqI43hywjwekNR7ZzhiVArJ WEezW1kNmICuB67NZjnJHXAtvLiIgZlUbq1BSrzRD1ACowA11rApL0EStlB18hbM82H9 OUgQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkzJd7kPxL7xE+/8dOTLXjvga3VG5V0V8sFw+78QIwCh1n3Z0Rx2MckOCW9oa1sHzbbvfqE X-Received: by 10.180.89.1 with SMTP id bk1mr19014944wib.17.1384880038736; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 08:53:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.93.105 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 08:53:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Drak Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:53:38 +0000 Message-ID: To: Wladimir Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04447f85c40f9204eb8a8236 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1VioYv-0006yr-23 Cc: Bitcoin Dev 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: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:54:06 -0000 --f46d04447f85c40f9204eb8a8236 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 19 November 2013 16:32, Wladimir wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> BIP drafts are stored in git://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git/drafts/ and >> are not automatically assigned a BIPS number. >> > > Are we going to move ahead with this? > > If so, I'm volunteering to create the repository and import the current > BIPs from the wiki there (and convert from wiki markup to markdown where > necessary). > > 2) Time passes. Software for BIP drafts is developed, tested, >> published, and publicly discussed in a typical open source manner. >> > > Personally I think it is useful to have a number as soon as a BIP can be > implemented, even if still in draft status; it gives something to refer to > when mentioning a certain improvement proposal (in commit messages and such > it could be called BIP xxx Draft). > I don't think we are at risk of running out of numbers to assign any time > soon. > It's quite normal for standards bodies to allocate numbers when in draft status. If they don't pass, they don't pass - they are clearly labelled DRAFTs. +1 on having things in a github repository. Much better for collaboration, Drak --f46d04447f85c40f9204eb8a8236 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 1= 9 November 2013 16:32, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
=

= On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>= wrote:
BIP drafts are stored in git://github.com/bitc= oin/bips.git/drafts/ and
are not automatically assigned a BIPS number.

Are we going to move ahead with this?

If so, I'= ;m volunteering to create the repository and import the current BIPs from t= he wiki there (and convert from wiki markup to markdown where necessary).

2) Time passes. =C2=A0Software for BIP drafts is developed, tested,
published, and publicly discussed in a typical open source manner.

Personally I think it is useful to have a numbe= r as soon as a BIP can be implemented, even if still in draft status; it gi= ves something to refer to when mentioning a certain improvement proposal (i= n commit messages and such it could be called BIP xxx Draft).
I don't think we are at risk of running out of numbers to as= sign any time soon.

It's quite normal for standards bodies to allocate numbers when in dra= ft status. If they don't pass, they don't pass - they are clearly l= abelled DRAFTs.

+1 on having things in a github repository. Much better= for collaboration,

Drak
--f46d04447f85c40f9204eb8a8236--