Add EIP: ERC/EIP Repository split #7329
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
An EIP giving motivation, rational, alternatives, and objections to the EIP/ERC split proposal.
|
✅ All reviewers have approved. |
github-actions
bot
added
c-new
eth-bot
added
e-consensus
github-actions
bot
added
w-ci
|
The commit f9dffa9 (as a parent of f3bf83e) contains errors. |
ProphetZX
approved these changes
Jul 14, 2023
xinbenlv
approved these changes
Jul 15, 2023
eth-bot
approved these changes
Jul 15, 2023
xinbenlv
reviewed
Jul 15, 2023
| title: ERC/EIP Repository split | ||
| description: Split the ERC specifications out of the EIP repository into a new repository, so that only core protocol EIPs remain | ||
| author: Lightclient (@lightclient), Danno Ferrin (@shemnon) | ||
| discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip-erc-repo-split/15053 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Optional: feel free to consider use existing EIP/ERC split FEM thread https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/proposal-forking-ercs-from-eips-repository/12804
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That didn't show up on my searches. Thanks.
|
This is merging to “draft”, doesn’t mean it is being adopted.
I personally still hold my reservation of the content of the proposal, but
I think procedure-wise, the text satisfy to be publish as an EIP Draft.
IIIUC, An Meta EIP being proposed and published as Draft or Review does not
mean it being adopted.
Only moving to Final means the adoption of the proposed EIP, which is what
you (@gcolvin) are blocking.
Since I am objecting the proposal, I feel that it’s more appropriate for me to approve it to publish as a draft to show to friendly collaborative spirit in this debate.
…On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 08:22 Greg Colvin ***@***.***> wrote:
This got merged despite my block? Or am I misunderstanding?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#7329 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAE4KRMH7SURY7EE63F4UPLXQKYUVANCNFSM6AAAAAA2JZW754>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
mattstam
reviewed
Jul 18, 2023
| 5. Create a unified document for editors to assign EIP/ERC numbers. EIPs and | ||
| ERCs will no longer be based on an initial PR number but on a number | ||
| incremented by the EIP editors of their respective repositories. EIPs will be | ||
| assigned even numbers and ERCs will be assigned odd numbers. The exact |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
typo: need to continue this sentence
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
An EIP giving motivation, rational, alternatives, and objections to the EIP/ERC split proposal.