Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for request assignment

Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for request assignment
2015-09-03 23:45 ` Btc Drak
                   ` (4 more replies)
  
From: Gregory Maxwell @ 2015-09-03 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Dev

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!)


 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
2015-09-03 23:45 ` 
                   ` 
  
From: Gregory Maxwell @ 2015-09-03 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Dev

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!)


 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
* 
  2015-09-03 23:18 [bitcoin-dev] Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for request assignment Gregory Maxwell

  2015-09-04  0:17 ` 
                   ` 
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Btc Drak @ 2015-09-03 23:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Gregory Maxwell;  Bitcoin Dev

It's a good idea. It would remove friction from the process and
assignment is auditable to boot, something I've had difficulty with in
the past. Almost every time I see a BIP number I would wonder, is that
self-assigned (and thus invalid) or has it been assigned by the BIP
editor.

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:18 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 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!)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


^ permalink raw reply	[|nested] 7+ messages in thread
2015-09-04  0:17 ` Marco Pontello

  
From: Gregory Maxwell @ 2015-09-04  0:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Marco Pontello;  Bitcoin Dev

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Marco Pontello <marcopon@gmail•com> wrote:
> None that I can see.
> In fact I was just about to ask for some details about this part of the
> process, so this come just at the right time.

We used to have a WIKI page for all the BIP stuff and that worked
better IMO, the use of git(hub) for it was a step forward in a number
of ways but made the number assignment part an odd duck. We should
have fixed it then, but it wasn't obvious (enough) that it needed
fixing at the time. Live and learn.


 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
* 
  2015-09-03 23:18 [bitcoin-dev] Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for request assignment Gregory Maxwell
  2015-09-03 23:45 ` Btc Drak

  2015-09-04  0:24   ` Gregory Maxwell
  2015-09-04 15:24 ` 
                   ` 
  4 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marco Pontello @ 2015-09-04  0:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Gregory Maxwell;  Bitcoin Dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1087 bytes --]

None that I can see.
In fact I was just about to ask for some details about this part of the
process, so this come just at the right time.

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> 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!)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>



-- 
Try the Online TrID File Identifier
http://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1766 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[|nested] 7+ messages in thread
2015-09-03 23:18 [bitcoin-dev] Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for request assignment Gregory Maxwell
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2015-09-04 15:24 ` Peter Todd

  2015-09-04 18:41 ` Eric Lombrozo
  
From: Douglas Roark @ 2015-09-04 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Dev

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

ACK

- -- 
- ---
Douglas Roark
Senior Developer
Armory Technologies, Inc.
doug@bitcoinarmory•com
PGP key ID: 92ADC0D7
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=G5PZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


 permalink raw reply	[|nested]
2015-09-03 23:18 [bitcoin-dev] Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for request assignment Gregory Maxwell
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2015-09-04 15:33 ` Douglas Roark

  
From: Eric Lombrozo @ 2015-09-04 18:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Gregory Maxwell, Bitcoin Dev

I think it's a reasonable approach. Once the number is assigned, the 
change is made and the pull request is updated.

Only thing is it would be nice to be able to indicate which pull 
requests are number requests and which pull requests are ready for 
merging. Perhaps we should make a special label for number requests.

- Eric

------ Original Message ------
From: "Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev" 
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Bitcoin Dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Sent: 9/3/2015 4:18:08 PM
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed minor change to BIP 01 to use a PR for 
request assignment

>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!)
>_______________________________________________
>bitcoin-dev mailing list
>bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev



 permalink raw reply	[|nested]