From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: Kalle Rosenbaum <kalle@rosenbaum•se>,
Kalle Rosenbaum via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>,
bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Process for BIP number allocation
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:29:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1C2C971-03EB-47F6-9879-D6EC659404D4@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPswA9yU8MkbS_7CkJBmRTTxBdZ+2fx7FetGaqeHMZGG0G=1eA@mail.gmail.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 23 July 2015 06:21:55 GMT-04:00, Kalle Rosenbaum via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>Hi all
>
>I suggest that we add to the "BIP Editor Responsibilities & Workflow"
>section of BIP0001 that if the BIP editor for some reason won't handle
>the BIP within a week, he/she should notify the author within that
>same week with an estimate on when it will be handled.
>
>Maybe we could extend it to two weeks instead, the important thing is
>that the author knows what to expect.
>
>I'm trying to get BIP numbers allocated for Proof of Payment. I have
>requested it from the BIP editor Gregory Maxwell with CC this list. I
>also emailed Gregory in private about it. So far I have not seen any
>reaction to my requests.
To be clear, where is an implementation of your proposed BIP?
The philosophy of the process - particularly for non-consensus BIPs - is running code, preferably in production. An actual number for the standard that code implements isn't a barrier to that process.
Remember that it's convenient for all if the number of BIPs out there isn't significantly higher than the number of actual standards in place that are being used.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQE9BAEBCAAnIBxQZXRlciBUb2RkIDxwZXRlQHBldGVydG9kZC5vcmc+BQJVsUBy
AAoJEMCF8hzn9Lnc47AIAI11FdNBCFr9TybCvxKS32Idk4aZ4fveJ6ucHZx1PWPl
lzoz/CJBZGolWF9jWnpyiCnNxl64MjflNxi62ZD+VS4SEl0uHcYXdqXsNQzk9OoK
bZFXHJ57jZlHCwpwiLM72EWN6AZG/XZZFXisNRAvoYqryHdb5dDmVok0wPH87qOH
PBTlspyaKH4/OFDpslCdoDTLHcMxlasiyqNdC5NxC7eB1WpEtyGbOd1twvNeNH00
1opJNuajiUm1vJEhMS67a9DhfnYf9/3TDRtkc0lrYfF3r1n2aVtyzlPcJANX/cWa
7L9HtC4WpVLqny0AiTs5dK6DxPIUy/u2Q9yFZ2oL6dM=
=RW4h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-23 19:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-23 10:21 Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-07-23 19:29 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2015-07-23 21:36 ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-07-24 2:26 ` Peter Todd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1C2C971-03EB-47F6-9879-D6EC659404D4@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kalle@rosenbaum$(echo .)se \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox