Sjors Provoost [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2017-09-27 📝 Original message:Op 27 sep. 2017, om 22:01 ...

📅 Original date posted:2017-09-27
📝 Original message:Op 27 sep. 2017, om 22:01 heeft Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> het volgende geschreven:
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
> What do people think about modifying BIP 2 to allow editors to merge these
> kinds of changes without involving the Authors? Strictly speaking, BIP 2
> shouldn't be changed now that it is Active, but for such a minor revision, I
> think an exception is reasonable.
>
> Even minor revisions can not change the meaning of text. Changing a single word can often have a strange impact on the meaning of the text. There should be some amount of care exercised here. Maybe it would be okay as long as edits are mentioned in the changelog at the bottom of each document, or mention that the primary authors have not reviewed suggested changes, or something as much; otherwise the reader might not be aware to check revision history to see what's going on.

Perhaps it's enough to @mention authors in the PR and give them a week to object before merging?

Sjors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170927/2bfcb0e8/attachment.html>;
-------------- 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/20170927/2bfcb0e8/attachment.sig>;