{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub12rkw0jajmsck4uwdtksdvtswrlkypusfryjzera7m4fhqta6jhdsz3aqxc","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub12rkw0jajmsck4uwdtksdvtswrlkypusfryjzera7m4fhqta6jhdsz3aqxc","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2013-11-19\n📝 Original message:On 19 November 2013 16:32, Wladimir \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e\n\u003e On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Jeff Garzik \u003cjgarzik at bitpay.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e BIP drafts are stored in git://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git/drafts/ and\n\u003e\u003e are not automatically assigned a BIPS number.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Are we going to move ahead with this?\n\u003e\n\u003e If so, I'm volunteering to create the repository and import the current\n\u003e BIPs from the wiki there (and convert from wiki markup to markdown where\n\u003e necessary).\n\u003e\n\u003e 2) Time passes.  Software for BIP drafts is developed, tested,\n\u003e\u003e published, and publicly discussed in a typical open source manner.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Personally I think it is useful to have a number as soon as a BIP can be\n\u003e implemented, even if still in draft status; it gives something to refer to\n\u003e when mentioning a certain improvement proposal (in commit messages and such\n\u003e it could be called BIP xxx Draft).\n\u003e I don't think we are at risk of running out of numbers to assign any time\n\u003e soon.\n\u003e\n\nIt's quite normal for standards bodies to allocate numbers when in draft\nstatus. If they don't pass, they don't pass - they are clearly labelled\nDRAFTs.\n\n+1 on having things in a github repository. Much better for collaboration,\n\nDrak\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131119/54f8eeca/attachment.html\u003e"}