Author: Amir Taaki 2012-03-14 15:07:29
Published on: 2012-03-14T15:07:29+00:00
Luke-jr withdrew BIP 16 and proposed support for BIP 17, receiving a consensus to move forward. However, he submitted BIP 18 which is not considered tenable. There seems to be no purpose to adopt BIP 18 when BIP 17 is being adopted. The author reviews the technical soundness of a BIP when it is submitted and evaluates community support at the end. The author also suggests that BIPs be presented to the Bitcoin-dev list for discussion and to flesh out the draft BIP before acceptance. This helps ensure proper formatting and high-quality proposals that meet specific criteria. BIP 18 does not appear to have followed these guidelines, and the author questions whether it should be accepted into the repo. Criteria for accepting a BIP include being a clear and complete description of the proposed enhancement, representing a net improvement, and having a solid proposed implementation that does not unduly complicate the protocol.
Updated on: 2023-06-06T03:38:27.665488+00:00