path: root/bc/45767d89397dd8a6a580199b1022509a46c9c4

Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEEF3C0032
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99B1E4664C
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:54 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 99B1E4664C
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key,
 unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=O7iAqTfr
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id f4ccnH5RBOLp
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.28])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7159F4AAFC
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:53 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 7159F4AAFC
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91FC35C00C3;
 Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:11:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
 by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:11:52 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date
 :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to
 :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject
 :subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender
 :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1698358312; x=1698444712; bh=cuw7+7wDuGZtB
 BTi5iAZc1U/sQZYegzwqlhSJHCwEIY=; b=O7iAqTfr1upxnYLKYuEWSIY5O5DLw
 3b+qetdvyKirp4TJnbfj2mDRjBtB9OjHSFkGyCQ0FV1XWXu4J0ZX+CETRxjvwHvM
 /VUNNMuTm5NR7r10DtPX50SIuW1rg3nEuJAGxwP+8A4mxcUxXWf6pyYrzFW93dJC
 5FdvFUXEFt4J7a56LS0oFFD+Kp1Qkc1ASc4nMFMC3Uw8oiQK6j5YDwlDIFXiA2FU
 g57EIKg09qOlhni1t+Ds+kxFvif8p8pKNaAJDlkpdZaPlaE6md4Lg+d/eJ9BpvXm
 yqSHMiG0WRigK/dEzG1EyTMxQ1kpn5kKdCNHlL4evt7gr5wKhu48eq+pA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:J-Q6ZVwawLPFdnqMsiB6ZPSnxKHAkTUb0mOwzfvHEH-wKfMXZFnRAw>
 <xme:J-Q6ZVT9P317VQhhRRl71VQflPBZ0z0t_9-OT60WIcvwWQsuVy3XhyS4U2zYrQJJB
 wj7PiVyPlCzLxjpEg4>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:J-Q6ZfWsqCoMoHLWxO4qwyMV_umxqTRxVwTMtaIjMiuDeAEtZX_GWXJiGhbKQB_qIzCjbcHygaAJ-u1d1_ZsLSw1-bl4>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrleefgddtkecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf
 curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu
 uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc
 fjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrvghtvghr
 ucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg
 hrnhepledvleelffdtudekudffjefgfeejueehieelfedtgfetudetgeegveeutefhjedt
 necuffhomhgrihhnpehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg
 eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdho
 rhhg
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:J-Q6ZXgu9eHUJGef0irW5SNEFVrc88EyAAZSl-q82n0bwdVM_3bmVg>
 <xmx:J-Q6ZXBdCKBlPcU36fgSyfPMtbf7m0W_3UolCbUlKIy9R68T2_jrgg>
 <xmx:J-Q6ZQIFqWu1sfHvFzGRwZO2EzU--EQJD3bFP5tOwa93VL-jR4hISQ>
 <xmx:KOQ6ZS-aanxP5oJk0_NrXmXhS7JqgpBkGSxB760FAFjb3PfZlo2ptw>
Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu,
 26 Oct 2023 18:11:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id F416E5F97F; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:50 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:50 +0000
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laolu32@gmail.com>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <ZTrkJrqzBB0e9dXB@petertodd.org>
References: <CANLPe+OQBsPiTrLEfz=SMxU8TkM_1XNfJQeq8gt2V6vDu=+Zxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZTaSwtvctmIiF74k@petertodd.org> <ZTawwRqGN4XUUu8C@camus>
 <5b641ddc-a30b-4dd7-2481-6d9cdb459359@dashjr.org>
 <CAO3Pvs_uUtCfhayU=3LCtpNGtkcDr=H0AM65bhNJcTMuBzWn_w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAO3Pvs_uUtCfhayU=3LCtpNGtkcDr=H0AM65bhNJcTMuBzWn_w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinals BIP PR
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: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 22:11:54 -0000


--bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 03:56:55PM -0700, Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-de=
v wrote:
> TL;DR: let's just use an automated system to assign BIP numbers, so we can
> spend time on more impactful things.

Yes, an easy way to do that is to use a mathematical function, like SHA256(=
<bip contents>)
or Pubkey(<bip author controlled secret key>).

Of course, that's also silly, as we might as well use URLs at that point...

> IIUC, one the primary roles of the dedicated BIP maintainers is just to h=
and
> out BIP numbers for documents. Supposedly with this privilege, the BIP
> maintainer is able to tastefully assign related BIPs to consecutive numbe=
rs,
> and also reserve certain BIP number ranges for broad categories, like 3xx
> for p2p changes (just an example).
>
> To my knowledge, the methodology for such BIP number selection isn't
> published anywhere, and is mostly arbitrary. As motioned in this thread,
> some perceive this manual process as a gatekeeping mechanism, and often
> ascribe favoritism as the reason why PR X got a number immediately, but P=
R Y
> has waited N months w/o an answer.
>=20
> Every few years we go through an episode where someone is rightfully upset
> that they haven't been assigned a BIP number after following the requisite
> process.  Most recently, another BIP maintainer was appointed, with the h=
ope
> that the second maintainer would help to alleviate some of the subjective
> load of the position.  Fast forward to this email thread, and it doesn't
> seem like adding more BIP maintainers will actually help with the issue of
> BIP number assignment.
>=20
> Instead, what if we just removed the subjective human element from the
> process, and switched to using PR numbers to assign BIPs? Now instead of
> attempting to track down a BIP maintainer at the end of a potentially
> involved review+iteration period, PRs are assigned BIP numbers as soon as
> they're opened and we have one less thing to bikeshed and gatekeep.
>=20
> One down side of this is that assuming the policy is adopted, we'll sorta
> sky rocket the BIP number space. At the time of writing of this email, the
> next PR number looks to be 1508. That doesn't seem like a big deal to me,
> but we could offset that by some value, starting at the highest currently
> manually assigned BIP number. BIP numbers would no longer always be
> contiguous, but that's sort of already the case.
>=20
> There's also the matter of related BIPs, like the segwit series (BIPs 141,
> 142, 143, 144, and 145). For these, we can use a suffix scheme to indicate
> the BIP lineage. So if BIP 141 was the first PR, then BIP 142 was opened
> later, the OP can declare the BIP 142 is BIP 141.2 or BIP 141-2. I don't
> think it would be too difficult to find a workable scheme.

At that point, why are we bothering with numbers at all? If BIP #'s aren't
memorable, what is their purpose? Why not just let people publish ideas on
their own web pages and figure out what we're going to call those ideas on a
case-by-case basis.

All this gets back to my original point: a functioning BIP system is
*inherently* centralized and involves human gatekeepers who inevitably have=
 to
apply standards to approve BIPs. You can't avoid this as long as you want a=
 BIP
system.

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=7e1G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bKaIUwmkWsagWC0m--