Published on: 2017-09-29T01:52:00+00:00
In a discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, there were proposals to modify BIP 2 in order to allow editors to merge changes without involving the authors. Luke Dashjr suggested this modification, but concerns were raised by Bryan Bishop and Sjors Provoost about the potential impact of even minor revisions on the meaning of the text. Bishop recommended mentioning edits in the changelog or indicating that primary authors have not reviewed the suggested changes. The suggestion was also made to have the BIP editor sign and timestamp all changes for clarity on who made the change.There was a suggestion by cdecker to have a sign-off mechanism for changes to BIPs, expanding beyond just the original author(s) to involve 2-3 community members attesting that the meaning of the BIP did not change. However, Dashjr's proposal to modify BIP 2 to allow editors to merge changes without involving the authors was met with concern from Bishop, who emphasized the need for caution due to the potential impact of even minor revisions on the meaning of the text. Bishop recommended mentioning edits in the changelog or ensuring readers are aware that primary authors have not reviewed the suggested changes. The discussion highlighted the importance of careful consideration when making changes to BIPs, as small alterations can have significant impacts on the meaning of the text.Dashjr's proposal to modify BIP 2 to allow editors to merge changes without involving authors was also discussed in a bitcoin-dev mailing list thread. However, Provoost expressed concerns about the potential for even minor revisions to change the meaning of the text. He suggested exercising caution by mentioning edits in the changelog or giving authors a week to object before merging. One possible solution proposed was to @mention authors in the PR and give them time to review suggested changes. No official conclusion was reached in the forum thread regarding this matter.Another member of the bitcoin-dev community, Bryan Bishop, raised concerns about the potential impact of even minor revisions on the meaning of the text in BIPs. He suggested exercising caution and proposed mentioning any edits in the changelog or notifying primary authors before merging changes. Sjors Provoost also suggested @mentioning authors in the PR and giving them a week to object before merging. However, no official conclusion was reached in the forum thread.Luke Dashjr proposed modifying BIP 2 to allow editors to merge changes without involving authors in the bitcoin-dev community. However, Bryan Bishop warned that even minor revisions could have a strange impact on the meaning of the text and suggested exercising caution. He proposed mentioning edits in the changelog or notifying the primary authors before merging. Sjors Provoost suggested @mentioning authors in the PR and giving them a week to object before merging. No official conclusion was reached in the forum thread.Luke Dashjr has proposed modifying BIP 2 to allow editors to merge changes without involving authors. However, there are concerns that even minor revisions could potentially change the meaning of the text, so caution is recommended. Bryan Bishop suggests mentioning edits in the changelog or providing notification to the primary authors before merging. Sjors Provoost suggests @mentioning authors in the PR and allowing them a week to object before merging. The discussion has not yet reached a conclusion on this matter.The BIPs repository often receives pull requests for spelling corrections and other editorial changes that are obvious to merge. Currently, the process requires authors of affected BIPs to acknowledge these changes, which is considered inefficient and unnecessary for such minor revisions. Luke Dashjr suggests modifying BIP 2 to allow editors to merge these types of changes without involving the authors. While it is noted that strictly speaking, BIP 2 should not be changed now that it is Active, an exception is deemed reasonable for a minor revision. A draft Pull Request (PR) for the proposed modification to BIP 2 has been prepared and can be found on Github at https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/596. Those who oppose this change have been requested to voice their concerns within the next month.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T21:57:27.697559+00:00