On Wednesday 14 February 2018 10:01:46 PM Marco Falke via bitcoin-dev wrote: > BIP 123 suggests that BIPs in the consensus layer should be assigned a > label "soft fork" or "hard fork". However, I think the differentiation > into soft fork or hard fork should not be made for BIPs that document > buried deployments. In contrast to soft forks and hard forks, buried > deployments do not require community and miner coordination for a safe > deployment.
They also do not require software coordination. Therefore, why should there be BIPs at all? Seems to me that we should instead add these documents to https://github.com/bitcoin-core/docs That being said, I'm also okay with just adding an Annex to the original softfork/hardfork BIP describing each shortcut. It just seems annoying to have two BIPs for every protocol change: one for the change itself, and then another for implementation-specific shortcuts taken. Luke _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev