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
|
Return-Path: <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 200151033
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Sep 2015 23:18:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ig0-f172.google.com (mail-ig0-f172.google.com
[209.85.213.172])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4EAF1A3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Sep 2015 23:18:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by igbkq10 with SMTP id kq10so4675570igb.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 03 Sep 2015 16:18:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=9XWCuNjkG4ARP+H3xdt/NnBEMwsl1YGHEW6jsgyyMq8=;
b=hWU+ODc/YVMP7wGvS1UMWqdIviHGt+Pyg2es+4WPJJ0dvkRBx1PehFrR1dJZpkikLn
lloUfZMnW/IIK0yDacnOCj2yp4f9h4l2fK8O0U9cJMVc2Yc7kc9kZPSbRCvHeLuh3ZDf
MgqyDIKJcgBSLal0A0XbyoxsIXZlSaJ3VYfUZslPoZPb9j1SURQTBvSZL8wBWSV2Z/yy
A7P026OC5CYavS8kt5SYlEQnPHw7uwO2DRyT9UJWDl+mIhdHht9MRJp9XzDXwbRjsIci
TeM2BBXoF8TTwfS2Yn7dd5Ie8FwpLld9x3TJje77K2L0CCN3jduQf5+SIJORIqvhgubl
4cdg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.7.67 with SMTP id h3mr1264575iga.66.1441322288260; Thu,
03 Sep 2015 16:18:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.19.30 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 16:18:08 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 23:18:08 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgR4iGshOgsammWQ93yD0GsckUgroX-sb7mDE7XuQb5k3g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for
request assignment
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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, 03 Sep 2015 23:18:09 -0000
The process in BIP01 was written when we used a different solution for
storing and presenting BIPs.
I'm thinking of suggesting that the number request process be changed
to opening a pull req with BIP text with no number (e.g. just using
the authors name and an index as the number) as the mechenism to
request number assignment.
Is there any reason that anyone would find this objectionable?
(Please do not respond to this message with anything but a strictly
directed answer to that question, start a new thread for a different
subject. Thanks!)
|
