{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-10-15\n📝 Original message:Hello,\n\nI'm trying to create a bit of process around the\nhttps://github.com/bitcoin/bips repository.\n\nA) Currently a lot of pulls are open for various BIPs and it is not\nclear who should comment on them, or who decides on changes to be\nmerged.\n\nCurrently all BIP changes have to go through the Bitcoin Core team,\nwhich is a narrow bottleneck and makes little sense when you think\nabout it. But I don't want to go back to the wiki state in which\neveryone can make arbitrary changes to any BIP - we need to distribute\nthe process somehow.\n\nI'd like to propose to make the author (or someone they delegate to)\nthe primary contact for each BIP. They should comment on changes, and\neither accept or reject them. If they accept them, the change will be\nmerged.\n\nOf course this means that there is a responsibility for the author to\nadhere to BIP 1. For example if your BIP is final, don't allow any\ntechnical changes. To do small clarifications, spelling or adding\nimplementations or examples is OK, but changing or adding to a\nprotocol is not - this needs a new BIP. Changing your BIP status\nwithout community consensus is also not OK.\n\nB) I also think it makes sense to move the BIP discussion (both about\nthe BIP process and individual BIPs) to a separate mailing list.\n\nbitcoin-development currently has a dual function: discussion of\nBitcoin Core implementation concerns, as well as global changes to\nBitcoin (in the form of BIPs).\n\nThis makes the list too busy for some people, but it is critical that\neveryone writing a Bitcoin node or client is up-to-date with proposals\nand can comment on them.\n\nWladimir"}