I believe a better solution would to use a gitlab clone such as gitlab, which sits on top of the git repo, and allows for custom code around the BIP process. Potentially one could even build Bitcoin into such a BIP system. If somebody wants to support a BIP he donates Bitcoins to that proposal. Somebody who actually implements the BIP can receive some percent of the bounty (while some percent goes to the Bitcoin foundation). Via such a platform one could create assurance contracts to kickstart BIP developments or Bitcoin extensions (public infrastructure which is not part of the core, such as opensourced exchanges). On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > On Monday, October 21, 2013 7:38:37 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: > > 1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)? > > Probably wouldn't hurt, but it'd likely need a rewrite in a more modular > and > formal form. > > > 2) Should the current wiki pages be taken down / forwarded to the git > repo > > or be auto updated from the git repo? > > Since it's the same format, I'd keep it up there, maybe with a link to the > git > repo on the main BIP index wiki page. > > > 3) Even though the information in BIP 50 is valuable, should it really be > > considered a BIP? > > It's a hardforking protocol change, so IMO yes. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > October Webinars: Code for Performance > Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. > Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most > from > the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >