Sjors Provoost [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2017-11-03 📝 Original message:I often find myself ...
📅 Original date posted:2017-11-03
📝 Original message:I often find myself wanting to leave relatively small comments on BIP's that are IMO not worth bothering this list.
By default each BIP has a wiki page for discussion, e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0150
This is linked to from the Comments-URI field in the BIP.
In order to leave a comment, you have to edit the wiki page. This process seems a bit clunky.
I think it would be better to use Github issues, with one Github issue for each BIP.
One concern might be that the ease of use of Github issues would move discussion away from this list. The issue could be temporarily locked to prevent that. The issue description could contain a standard text explaining what should be discussed there and what would be more appropriate to post on the mailinglist.
Another concern might be confusing between PR's which create and update a BIP, and the discussion issue.
If people think this a good idea, would the next step be to propose a change to the process here?
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#BIP_comments
Or would this be a new BIP?
Sjors
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171103/fdb12e98/attachment.sig>;
📝 Original message:I often find myself wanting to leave relatively small comments on BIP's that are IMO not worth bothering this list.
By default each BIP has a wiki page for discussion, e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0150
This is linked to from the Comments-URI field in the BIP.
In order to leave a comment, you have to edit the wiki page. This process seems a bit clunky.
I think it would be better to use Github issues, with one Github issue for each BIP.
One concern might be that the ease of use of Github issues would move discussion away from this list. The issue could be temporarily locked to prevent that. The issue description could contain a standard text explaining what should be discussed there and what would be more appropriate to post on the mailinglist.
Another concern might be confusing between PR's which create and update a BIP, and the discussion issue.
If people think this a good idea, would the next step be to propose a change to the process here?
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#BIP_comments
Or would this be a new BIP?
Sjors
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171103/fdb12e98/attachment.sig>;