Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Prenumbered BIP naming

From: Matt Whitlock <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 13:01:43 -0400

On Monday, 12 May 2014, at 9:53 am, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I've noticed some folks struggling to attach labels to their yet to be
> numbered BIPs.
> 
> I'd recommend people call them "draft-<main author name>-<what it
> does>" like draft-maxwell-coinburning in the style of pre-WG IETF
> drafts.

Why is there such a high bar to getting a number assigned to a BIP anyway? BIP 1 seems to suggest that getting a BIP number assigned is no big deal, but the reality seems to betray that casual notion. Even proposals with hours of work put into them are not getting BIP numbers. It's not exactly as though there's a shortage of integers. Are numbers assigned only to proposals that are well liked? Isn't the point of assigning numbers so that we can have organized discussions about all proposals, even ones we don't like?