EIP Editing Office Hour #53 (EIP Only)

Transcript

welcome to EIP editing office hour meeting number 53 this is E's only meeting in which we are going to review all the eips GitHub repositories P requests only uh we are J we are joined by Sam Wilson to go over the proposals or the pull requests which are already added this is issue number 383 thank you Sam for joining and please take it sure happy to be here so let's take a look at these so we're looking at document block has and eof uh so why is this not merging it is

missing yeah okay so it's an easy one just say let's see if there's a port request for that so 3540 there is no not hi oh move to

review hey thank you for joining G Singh uh so we are on the first PR that Sam is uh reviewing maybe we can take it after that thank you yeah okay so I think this one just needs to be updated um let's see and that was 3540 3540 is in stag yeah so this just needs to be rebased um so I will oh and I can't edit this one I don't

think no okay um all right and that's it for this one thank you so much Sam very well um we are joined by gajendra Singh as well and uh the next PR for review is 9306 gajender if you would like to start sharing your screen yeah okay um give me a second e

um my want to D so let oh sorry my window died in a window so let me restart it again sure no worries um maybe I can take the next one if you like yeah yeah that's what I was suggesting maybe Sam will take the next one and whenever you're ready you can share your screen yeah thank you Sam no no worries I I can't try to share the screen if Sam is Sam is already sharing maybe you would want to try

again e well is it coming through now it is yeah we can proceed with the next one second

yeah miscell miscellaneous second right perfect I mean uh even if we accept this then there is another

um linter error that will need to be fixed so maybe I'll just comment on that e okay we can go to the next one

9290 e I mean are we concerned about uh any IP having a python implementation I mean is this I'm not sure about this what do you

think Sam so I think the part of the goal of having eels is to have a python implementation especially since it's used to fill the um the client tests so um I I'm in favor of it but I'm also a little biased you should we wait for team's approval

on it um is it yeah it only requires yeah requires approval room team e e

I mean even though people are saying that this is Spam or they are already incentivized they could be explicitly incentivized as well but I'm not sure whether what to do about this it's doesn't seem that it's correctly formatted as of now did we not give it an EIP number because of the current reservations or what happened yeah I think that's what we were doing there um yeah there there's not enough content in here to give it an IP number so maybe we should just write

that and or close it up I don't understand okay you that's what you have commented so maybe we let this prb open like this I mean I don't think that we should close it I imagine just adding the comment would help them add more content so when it is fleshed out properly we will bring it back for discussion I think Sam has already mentioned that

uh okay I can one more comment on it e

e e e

e e I think I put them in wrong header not

all of them were supposed to be closed I just guess couple of them were the ERC one and the one that you have already closed yeah this also seems like an ERC only yeah so I think even if we review it here it does not make sense because it has to be moved to a different repo in order to be merged yep

e e e e

the good news here is like uh we have started receiving reviews from uh reviewers technical reviews from there so this particular proposal is already reviewed by one of the reviewers yeah so I have noticed that and I have seen this proposal for review uh before as well but I think uh the lent is not passing so maybe I'll just add that comment right yeah I think it would be a good idea to have

these checks in place I'm aware that eaps insight has already added EAP validator um on recommendation of Sam but Sam I'm not sure if we can also do the HTML proofer and markdown lender um added there so I am almost done rewriting everything so I will have a thing to show like probably at the next P IP about all of this so one thing I think we we basically the behavior that is coming up is what that you know when people propose eips or they propose changes

then the discussion of that is happening here only instead of at discussion to link most of the times and actually it's because it's more vibrant or more I mean very contextual to the proposal and uh I'm not sure what what we should do over here because this discussion for example you know people we should we keep keep the PRS open till the discussions has bound down uh because for example even if this PR is good to be merged in draft uh in terms of uh uh editing but seems like the discussion is not over

and if we for example merge it then discussion Contex text will be lost in any of the additional PRS and whenever whenever authors do additional PRS they get Auto merged so what what should we do about basically you know making sure that discussions here are not lost and are sort of bridged um I'm not sure that there's much we can do um like you can always post a link to the pull request in the discussion thread um but like we have to merge the pr whether there's technical discussion on it or not or else like it won't get into the

repository the good thing here is like whenever it is in draft status generally while opening The Fellowship of ethereum magician thread they add the pr for the draft proposal so it will be added but one thing that comes to my mind is sooner we allocate them the EIP number and merge the proposal no more discussion will happen on that thread and going forward all the discussions can be moved to the fellowship of a magician page it just that before the proposal is merged we see a lot of conversation especially which are not spec related Happening Here on on the PLL request

oh basically this has this old bug off save PR number maybe I should just close and open the p e

e e e

e e e

e e e

e e e all right so there is some more work

that is still needed in this uh proposal so I'll leave it to the author to come back on it sounds good the next one is hardware and bandwidth requirement I guess um yeah that I already looked and uh there there are some Lal issues to be resolved in that okay perfect e

e e e

e e e

e e e

e e e I will look a little bit more

deeply in this prop uh more deeply into this proposal and see uh whether everything uh makes sense or not looks like it does h

e e Sam this seems like an ERC

right probably yeah it has smart contracts in it so yeah yeah it was on interface side that's why it's here um but yeah we can move it to either of the repository because both repositories contain interface proposals I mean this uh so basically it is so this proposal is basically doesn't has any impact on consensus mechanism so that's why I think it places

ERC very well then we can perhaps leave a comment for the author to move it to the ERC GitHub repository e e

e e e yeah yeah so this anyway requires the

review from the author of this particular for IB so uh I'm basically then leaving it to so spoke to review it sounds good and it seems like we have received a comment on PR 9174 um I don't know if author is signaling to move discussion somewhere else or just yeah if you would like to take a look at PR 9174 so I think author is making the changes

that I have asked for and uh yeah so basically let him do that and then review it once it's done sounds good so that's all those were added for today well thank you yeah I think those were added for today um for today's meeting what I did was like I tried to use the filter that is provided on EIP board and selected the one which were for E editors attention there I think we can perhaps use this for future meetings for

eips and erc's as well to pull some uh open PRS uh into review with with the edites here thank you you both for but pu we still had some which were for the review of the authors so maybe we need to further fix the filtering very well I will I will take this feedback with the team and yeah just trying to make sure that we get only uh editors review PLL request into this list very well thank you so much Sam and

gajendra Singh for reviewing all these proposals this is um one in in a month where we keep only EIP related proposals but for the next week we do have EIP plus ERC proposals for review so any author uh who are interested in sharing their proposal and have any questions that they would want to be answered please feel free to drop it on the agenda that we have already created and yeah see you in a week thank you all for joining us here today