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.

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

EIPIP Meeting 34 Agenda #70

Closed
poojaranjan opened this issue May 24, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

EIPIP Meeting 34 Agenda #70

poojaranjan opened this issue May 24, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member

poojaranjan commented May 24, 2021

Date and Time

Wednesday, June 02, 2021, at 15:00 UTC

Location

Zoom: TBA in the Discord #eip-editing channel

YouTube Live Stream/Recording: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4cwHXAawZxpLrRIkDlBjDUUrGgF91pQw

Agenda

1. EIP/ERC editor

  • Editor's onboarding
  • Editors funding

2. Progress on EIP GitHub repo action bot. Ref: Issue

3. Progress on JSON RPC API spec in Eth1.0 repo

4. Progress on 'canonical source for EIPs' WIP doc

  • Changes to EIP-1

5. Review action items from the previous meeting

Anything else (please add a comment)

Next Call - June 16, 2021.

@Spore-Druid-Bray
Copy link

Spore-Druid-Bray commented Jun 2, 2021

(action items?) From previous meeting:

Micah felt we should actively discourage claiming that draft-status EIPs are standards and the implementation of these drafts. Lightclient wasn't sure how this discouragement could occur, instead proposing work on the draft occurs as soon as possible.
Edson Ayllon felt a (red) warning banner for unfinished / unaccepted ERCs could work. Micah was supportive. The hunt is on for someone who knows CSS/HTML to jump on the EIP repo. Alita Moore said it's something they could do.

Discussion arose as to whether William Schwab should become an ERC editor. He writes smart contracts and has been working with magicians.

Lightclient raised the idea of hosting 'consultation hours' where "people could come...and they could just you know give a five minute pitch of their idea, and someone could stamp it like “this is not an ERC”". Will Schwab provided some resistance to this idea, supposing there could be a wave of low-effort engagement. In the name of time this wasn't resolved.

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

Closing in favor of #72

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants