Author: Luke Dashjr 2016-02-02 07:54:29
Published on: 2016-02-02T07:54:29+00:00
In an email thread, Dave Scotese addresses the question of whether multiple applications providing their own implementations of API/RPC and corresponding application layer BIPs would be beneficial for Bitcoin. He states that if every application had its own BIP, none of them would be standards and it wouldn't make sense to have a BIP at all. The status of a BIP should be unrelated to comments and vice versa. Additionally, the author of a BIP should be allowed to specify other internet locations for comments, however, this could potentially be abused to discourage negative comments or censor them. For section "Formally defining consensus," clear reasoning must be offered where objections were not deemed substantiated by the community. Comments on BIPs should be solicited on the bitcoin-dev mailing list and summarized fairly in the wiki, with notice of summarization and time for suggesting edits on the mailing list. However, Wiki registration and monitoring should not be a required hurdle to participation.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T03:32:28.880752+00:00