Published on: 2013-10-21T10:21:27+00:00
Melvin Carvalho, a follower of free/libre and open-source software (FLOSS) projects, expressed admiration for the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) process. He believes that this process is agile and strikes a balance between necessary features and documentation, which will help maintain the momentum of Bitcoin in the short to medium term. The BIP process is also used in other systems such as Python. Other enhancement proposal processes similar to BIP are used in XMPP and BitTorrent.In an email conversation, Jean-Paul Kogelman suggests organizing BIPs into subdirectories that map onto the status of the BIP. Martin Sustrik asks if it has been considered to do this via IETF, but notes that the process can take many years and there may be costs involved. However, he praises the BIP process as an agile process that strikes a balance between needed features and documentation, and believes it will continue to drive Bitcoin’s momentum in the short to medium term.In a discussion thread, Jean-Paul Kogelman proposes organizing a list into subdirectories that correspond to the status of BIP 1. Martin suggests considering using IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) for this process, noting their extensive experience in handling over 7000 RFCs through a hardened process developed over 40 years.Jean-Paul Kogelman suggests organizing BIPs into subdirectories based on their status- Accepted, Active, Draft, Deferred, Final, Rejected, Replaced, or Withdrawn. Martin then asks if the process could be done via IETF, which has over 40 years of experience and 7000+ RFCs.Peter Todd suggests making a GitHub repository for Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) to make it easier to archive and update them. Todd creates a GitHub repository and copies the exact text of the BIP from the bitcoin.it wiki using MediaWiki support. Jeff Garzik agrees with Todd's proposal and nominates him to do the conversion.Wladimir van der Laan expresses frustration with the unfriendly behavior of some Bitcoin developers on forums. He cautions against sending people to these forums and emphasizes that they are not endorsed by the developer community. However, he notes that the core developer community is relatively small and reviewing and testing proposals can take time.On October 19, 2013, Jean-Paul Kogelman asks Luke Dashjr about the process for obtaining a BIP number. Dashjr directs Kogelman to BIP 1 which outlines the proposal process.Mitar shares an interesting read from the Berkeley School of Information about Bitcoin's development community. The conversation touches on newcomer experience and potential issues with communication and transparency. Some pull requests were left unaddressed for long periods of time due to shortages of active review and prioritization of safety-critical changes.In an email conversation, Mitar suggests that the Bitcoin community could benefit from adopting a code of conduct similar to Ubuntu's. The Ubuntu Code of Conduct v2.0 emphasizes collaboration, respect, taking responsibility for actions and decisions, and valuing diversity.The provided links lead to an article on "Open Collaboration and Peer Production" from the University of California, Berkeley. The author discusses the principles behind successful open collaboration efforts and identifies key factors that contribute to their success. The link to Mitar's personal website showcases his work and interests in various areas, including software development and blockchain technology.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T06:00:06.166160+00:00