Author: Btc Drak 2015-09-07 19:37:06
Published on: 2015-09-07T19:37:06+00:00
The author of the article addresses a common misunderstanding about Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) by clarifying that the BIP process is not solely under the control of the BIPs project. BIPs are essentially mini white papers that outline a problem, solution or proposal to the technical community with reference implementations attached. The BIP publication process is relatively loose, and the BIP editor sifts through submissions to filter out nonsense proposals. However, the implementation and acceptance of BIPs in Bitcoin software such as Bitcoin Core is separate from the BIPs authoring and publishing process.For non-consensus critical proposals like BIP64, acceptance can be determined by the number of software projects implementing the proposal and the number of users it impacts. For consensus critical proposals like BIP66, the proposal must be implemented in software and hope they are adopted. Bitcoin Core is the most widely used reference implementation, but their rules are not binding on everyone in the ecosystem. The author highlights a specific proposal submitted by Andy Chase which aims at getting BIPs accepted but misses the bigger picture. While the current process for accepting a BIP is not clearly defined, the goal is to define a system that ensures clear and fair acceptance of proposals. Client implementations, users, miners, and merchants should feel secure implementing and using a feature that has clear acceptance. This process isn't meant to force anything on client implementors, users, miners, or merchants.The status of a BIP is not determined by anyone but rather by adoption, where consensus happens. Although the process is loose, there have been many BIPs added recently with zero bureaucracy or friction. BIP0001 defines the BIP process, and the only controversial BIP is one that seeks to change the way BIPs are handled.In terms of enforcement and organization, it is preferable to avoid setting up an organization to manage the BIP process since participation is voluntary. The author suggests that committees can filter a range of opinions, but they may work in the dark and censor opinions, leading to centralization of power and groupthink/political maneuvers. Another possible approach is micro votes, where each user can represent themselves without censorship, but manipulation and lack of motivation are potential issues.The author wants to stimulate ideas on governance regarding the BIP process. The BIP process does not have to replace any particular BIP process as-is, but rather could be an alternative that proceeds on its own indefinitely without replacement.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T22:05:49.654394+00:00