[Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Wladimir
Hello, I'm trying to create a bit of process around the https://github.com/bitcoin/bips repository. A) Currently a lot of pulls are open for various BIPs and it is not clear who should comment on them, or who decides on changes to be merged. Currently all BIP changes have to go through the

[Bitcoin-development] Proposed BIP status changes

2014-10-15 Thread Wladimir
These BIPs should go to Final state - they are implemented all over the place, and are thus entirely fixed in place now. Any changes would require a new BIP as amandment: - BIP 14 (BIP Protocol Version and User Agent) - BIP 21 (URI Scheme) - BIP 22 (getblocktemplate - Fundamentals) - BIP 31

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm trying to create a bit of process around the https://github.com/bitcoin/bips repository. A) Currently a lot of pulls are open for various BIPs and it is not clear who should comment on them, or who decides on

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Wladimir
This all makes a lot of sense to me, and would help a lot with the workflow. Unfortunately github pulls and issues really have nothing to faciltate a multistage workflow... e.g. where something can go through several steps. Indeed, pull requests don't have a status. It would be possible to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Gavin Andresen
RE: process: I like author == primary control, and an assume they will do the right thing, revert if they don't RE: separate mailing list for BIP discussion: Great idea. Jeff Garzik was looking for a better mailing list solution than SourceForge, but assuming there isn't a clearly better

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Mike Hearn
Great idea. Jeff Garzik was looking for a better mailing list solution than SourceForge, but assuming there isn't a clearly better solution I think we should create a strictly moderated bitcoin-bips@lists.sourceforge list. Let's stay away from SF.net or any mailman-controlled lists if at

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Adam Back
please not google groups *, I'd vote for sourceforge or other simple open list software over google groups. Adam * Google lists are somehow a little proprietary or gmail lockin focused eg it makes things extra hard to subscribe with a non-google address if google has any hint that your address

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Peter Todd
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 04:54:57PM +0100, Adam Back wrote: please not google groups *, I'd vote for sourceforge or other simple open list software over google groups. Adam * Google lists are somehow a little proprietary or gmail lockin focused eg it makes things extra hard to subscribe

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Mike Hearn
I don't care much what exact list software/service is used, but lists.sf.net hasn't changed in years and is basically dying. Trashing all @yahoo accounts because ancient mailman does a MITM attack on people's email is no good, it's not any better than a web proxy that breaks every SSL connection.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Btc Drak
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Adam Back a...@cypherspace.org wrote: please not google groups *, I'd vote for sourceforge or other simple open list software over google groups. Please not sourceforge. * Google lists are somehow a little proprietary or gmail lockin focused eg it makes

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Cory Fields
Sounds like this is what you're after, it's a fairly new feature: https://github.com/blog/1375%0A-task-lists-in-gfm-issues-pulls-comments I've been meaning to use it in a PR to try it out. Cory On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote: This all makes a lot of sense to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Peter Todd
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:00:10PM +0100, Btc Drak wrote: * Google lists are somehow a little proprietary or gmail lockin focused eg it makes things extra hard to subscribe with a non-google address if google has any hint that your address is associated with a gmail account. Quite

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed BIP status changes

2014-10-15 Thread Matt Corallo
On 10/15/14 08:47, Wladimir wrote: These BIPs should go to Final state - they are implemented all over the place, and are thus entirely fixed in place now. Any changes would require a new BIP as amandment: - BIP 14 (BIP Protocol Version and User Agent) - BIP 21 (URI Scheme) ACK. -

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed BIP status changes

2014-10-15 Thread Luke Dashjr
On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 8:47:18 AM Wladimir wrote: These BIPs should go to Final state - they are implemented all over the place, and are thus entirely fixed in place now. Any changes would require a new BIP as amandment: - BIP 14 (BIP Protocol Version and User Agent) ACK - BIP 21

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP process

2014-10-15 Thread Luke Dashjr
On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 7:40:04 PM Peter Todd wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:00:10PM +0100, Btc Drak wrote: * Google lists are somehow a little proprietary or gmail lockin focused eg it makes things extra hard to subscribe with a non-google address if google has any hint that

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request for review/testing: headers-first synchronization in Bitcoin Core

2014-10-15 Thread Rebroad (sourceforge)
Hi all, I've also been spending a few months coding upon the change's Pieter has been making with the headersfirst8 pull request. My code updates are also ready to test, and are available on github at https://github.com/rebroad/bitcoin/ and the branch is sipa-headersfirst8-patches. I've made a