Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

EIPIP Meeting 96 #300

Closed
8 of 11 tasks
poojaranjan opened this issue Nov 29, 2023 · 7 comments
Closed
8 of 11 tasks

EIPIP Meeting 96 #300

poojaranjan opened this issue Nov 29, 2023 · 7 comments

Comments

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member

poojaranjan commented Nov 29, 2023 •
edited

Date and Time

Dec 13, 2023 at 16:00 UTC

Location

Zoom: TBA in the Discord #eip-editing channel

YouTube Recording: EIPIP Meetings

Agenda

1. EIP Process Standardization

2. Discuss Open Issues/PRs, and other topics

Call for Input

Call For Input Status Result Comments
#287 Open - Deadline completed on Nov 19, 2023
#291 Open - 1 Editor voted to oppose. Multiple other responses added. The deadline ended on November 30, 2023.
#293 Open - 2 Editors opposed to merging the PR. The deadline ended on Dec 09.

Changes to Final proposals

3. Other discussions continued or updates from past meetings

Changes to Final EIPs

  • Why Final EIPs are "Immutable"?
  • Specify conditions under which Final EIPs can be updated.

4. EIPs Insight - Monthly EIPs status reporting.

5. EIP Editing Office Hour

6. Review action items from earlier meetings

Next Meeting date & time

Jan 03 at 15:00 UTC?
@poojaranjan poojaranjan mentioned this issue Dec 12, 2023
Closed
9 tasks
@abcoathup
Copy link

Need a process for moving/cloning EIPs as RIPs and how they are numbered.
EIP7212 has been moved or cloned (not clear on which yet) and whether it is best to keep the same number: https://github.com/ethereum/RIPs/pull/5/files#r1424823634

Can't attend the meeting as the time is incompatible with life in Australia.

@danceratopz
Copy link

If time permits, @smartprogrammer93 and I would be happy to discuss an idea to introduce a versioning scheme for Standards Track EIPs: ethereum/EIPs#8034

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

@abcoathup @danceratopz
items added!

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

Summary

1. EIP Process Standardization

Updates on ethereum/ERCs#1

  • PandaPip wasn't available. No updates were shared.

Web Page Rendering

  • @SamWilsn has been working on webpage rendering
  • Continued working on eth-review bot wrt working group-based rendering
  • It's possible to have one domain to render all working group-based eips.

Need a process for moving/cloning EIPs as RIPs and how they are numbered.

  • suggested by @abcoathup
  • EIP-7212 has been moved to RIP repo. The question is whether to have the same or a new number.
  • @SamWilsn mentioned that he supports having an L2 working group manage the process.
  • @gcolvin mentioned that the group should have the freedom to decide on the process but it will be nice to have them part of the EIP-ERC numbering system to have unique EIP, ERC & RIP documentation.
  • @poojaranjan and @gcolvin agreed that "Core" is not the best category as that enlists proposals for the Ethereum Mainnet deployment.

2. Discuss Open Issues/PRs, and other topics

ethereum/EIPs#8034

  • Danceratopz and Ahmad Bitar introduced this new proposal.
  • Major, minor, patch versioning
  • It will be helpful for testing team and other following the breaking changes of the specification.
  • Closely tied to EIP status, helpful for implementation
  • Changelog has to be added for tooling but EIP editors has to be more attentive.
  • It can be author provided.
  • It can not go retroactively update older EIPs but for future EIPs only.
  • @SamWilsn with questions helped us understand the proposal even better, worth following the discussion
  • Overall people on the call considered to be a good proposal.
  • Victor (ERC editor) shared generally positive feeling and follow the implementation on EIPs side to be considered on the ERC side as well.

Call For Input

#287

@SamWilsn doesn’t feel comfortable without consulting other Editors on the call.
Victor: Leave them as is
Greg: Moved
Matt: Delete (but mostly indifferent)
@SamWilsn will update and close the Call for Input

#291

  • Editors may add comments
  • Will be closed by EOD today

#293

  • Editors may add comments
  • Will be closed by EOD today

Changes to Final proposals

Update 1271

  • Howey
  • Found some weird edge case with 1271
  • Hoping to have the disclosure process to update the proposal
    @SamWilsn thinks it is good venue to talk about Security vulnerability in general

In response to do we want to update a Final EIP with “Security vulnerability”

  • Matt: Probably not
  • Victor: Yes, but depends on case by case
  • Greg: no opinion

@poojaranjan suggested to have Call For Input to have conditions specified under which a “Final” proposal can be updated

Next Meeting date & time - Jan 03 at 15:00 UTC

@poojaranjan poojaranjan mentioned this issue Dec 13, 2023
Closed
7 tasks
@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

Closing in favor of #302

@ethcatherders ethcatherders deleted a comment Dec 21, 2023
@vittominacori
Copy link

Hello @poojaranjan, any update about these PRs?

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

Added to the next agenda!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
5 participants
@vittominacori @abcoathup @poojaranjan @danceratopz and others