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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1ViogB-0002Lq-G2
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 19 Nov 2013 17:01:35 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.215.41 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.215.41; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-la0-f41.google.com;
Received: from mail-la0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Viog9-0001u3-0X
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 19 Nov 2013 17:01:35 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id eo20so242422lab.14
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:01:26 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.130.168 with SMTP id of8mr114085lbb.66.1384880486283;
Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:01:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.63.162 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:01:26 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CANAnSg1eH8+sY6n4-cptdzS5Qj0aXdN_d8h8B9joyk73HGL6ZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJHLa0MCJzFapBYu+cGcJobeVkuS3yibpgaEJOmEj5-1wWEDYA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+s+GJDnCx4ZT5woovB-MsKfHOqNoC9WefKQ-VMpWHCZrat5Kw@mail.gmail.com>
<CANAnSg1eH8+sY6n4-cptdzS5Qj0aXdN_d8h8B9joyk73HGL6ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:01:26 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgREw+5NWaFVYd9FS-s63_-24tyWsz5_w6yc8+mGnFYUgQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Drak <drak@zikula.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
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: zikula.org]
-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: 1Viog9-0001u3-0X
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: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 17:01:35 -0000
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Drak <drak@zikula.org> wrote:
> 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,
The IETF makes a clear distinction between individual proposals and
documents which have been accepted by a working group. The former are
named after their authors. Work is not assigned a number until it is
complete.
I believe it is important to distinguish complete work that people
should be implementing from things which are incomplete, and even
more important to distinguish the work of single parties.
Otherwise you're going to get crap like BIP90: "Increase the supply of
Bitcoins to 210 million" being confused as an earnest proposal
supported by many that has traction.
|
