Ryan Grant [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2016-02-04 📝 Original message:On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2016-02-04
📝 Original message:On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Various changes have been made based on initial input.
> Further review and re-review is of course welcome.
These recent edits definitely guide us towards less hard feelings when
comments are offered, without excessive policy structure.
[BIP 2:]
> A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it
> achieves rough consensus on the mailing list.
Is this mix of wiki and mailing list intentional? If so, the wiki
talk page is meant to be a self-curated permanent record of support
and dissent, but second-order reply commentary might fall either on
the wiki or the mailing list?
Mediawiki offers watchlists on a polling model, and there is some
email support [1], but it would be nice of a BIP author to at least
gather new/edited comment titles and report them to bitcoin-dev once a
week, during review. Someone has to stare at the diffs.
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Page_change_notification
BIP 2 should ask that all current and future forums that BIP authors
might choose for review have indisputable records of moderation and
user edits.
Is dump.bitcoin.it a sufficient public record of contentious
moderation or user cross-comment editing? It seems like as long as
the wiki as a whole is verifiable, it would suffice.
📝 Original message:On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Various changes have been made based on initial input.
> Further review and re-review is of course welcome.
These recent edits definitely guide us towards less hard feelings when
comments are offered, without excessive policy structure.
[BIP 2:]
> A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it
> achieves rough consensus on the mailing list.
Is this mix of wiki and mailing list intentional? If so, the wiki
talk page is meant to be a self-curated permanent record of support
and dissent, but second-order reply commentary might fall either on
the wiki or the mailing list?
Mediawiki offers watchlists on a polling model, and there is some
email support [1], but it would be nice of a BIP author to at least
gather new/edited comment titles and report them to bitcoin-dev once a
week, during review. Someone has to stare at the diffs.
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Page_change_notification
BIP 2 should ask that all current and future forums that BIP authors
might choose for review have indisputable records of moderation and
user edits.
Is dump.bitcoin.it a sufficient public record of contentious
moderation or user cross-comment editing? It seems like as long as
the wiki as a whole is verifiable, it would suffice.