EIP Editing Office Hour #66 (EIP Only)

Transcript

[Music] Oh, with you. Heat. Heat. N. [Music] Hey hey hey.

[Music] Heat. Heat.

[Music] Heat. Hey, Heat. [Music] [Music]

Hey, [Music] let's move on. [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] is 1 036.

Okay. So um I provided uh the correct EIP number for this uh particular EIP and uh seems like the author has corrected it and uh then I'll go through this EIP and sort of see if there is anything missing or any uh particular issues that needs to be addressed. Uh so we will basically uh then come back to this I guess. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean like if there is more than anything other than EAP number that makes sense.

>> Yeah. I just uh you know I just uh added the command for EIP number. I didn't actually review the EIP. So go through this. Yeah, got it. Yeah. Anyway, this is a draft proposal. So, it would be a good idea to have over overview of the proposal. Um, the next one here we have got is 1041. [Music] I guess this EIP needs to be allotted uh

EIP number. [Music] >> Mhm. >> And I I also need to see whether this is an EIP or an ERC because seems like it's an ERC. >> Yeah, I had that confusion as well. Uh initially I thought it's a spam but then I had to delete my comment. >> So I'll just drop in a I will only assign any IP number once the author uh sort of uh explains his rational why he wants as an EIP otherwise author is

free to move to an ERC to the ERC report. Yeah sure. [Music]

All right, moving to miscellaneous section. Yes. Yes, please. Uh these are like smaller edits to the original proposals or small changes. Those are proposed. >> Sounds good. I think uh this is best addressed by the

author because even though the change might seem like a logical one specifying the spec link uh but whether the link points the right version or not uh is the call of author and uh I'm leaving for author to come back on Okay. Yeah, this also requires review from the

authors itself. Um, I'm not sure for this one because Okay. Yeah. Brand Mint and Marco Polo. Okay. Okay. No worries. I think we should find a way in which we can get attention of authors more frequently because there are a lot of penting for authors only.

[Music] >> Maybe uh we should s have sort of you know have a short uh slot in ACD where basically we bring up these kind of PRs and sort of push the authors to act on them. Yeah, that sounds like an interesting suggestion. We would try to like put them together and share the list. They can take a look at their own convenient time. Yeah. Al this also seems like a

technical change so it is best addressed by the author himself. Mhm. from uh 1 07's

title. It seems like uh it is also uh basically a technical change and would be best addressed by the author. Um I think here uh the proposer is requesting edits to my understanding is the reviewer not the author. [Music] It seems like there were some suggestion from the EIP reviewer and the author has updated those included those

suggestions. >> We waiting for the link to open. >> Okay, no worries. This was triple07. Yeah. Just give me a moment. Let me check my

internet configuration. >> Yeah, sure. No worries. [Music] [Music]

Uh, give me a moment. I think I need to restart my Firefox. >> Sure, no worries. And I believe we received response from the other author saying that this is an EIP not an ERC. Uh for the previous proposal 10 0 41. Yeah. Yeah, my Zoom got crashed while

resharing. I'm trying again. Chucky. [Music] All right, we are back. Uh, so what did

you say Puja? >> So we were looking into uh the PR number 1807. It seems that proposer the author of the proposal is there and he has responded to the comments added by EIP reviewer and is finally looking for further review so the proposal can be updated or merged. So yeah, so it's the author who is

trying to update and >> yeah, dragon is the author here >> and it seems like uh basically the bot seems stuck I guess because otherwise this should have been merged >> automatically. Yes. >> It's not even asking for anyone's review >> Mhm. >> any further. So I'll just close and reopen the PR. >> Okay. It might also be the um requested change that's sitting there.

>> Yeah, but requested change is not requested uh by somebody. >> Yeah, it's only read only. Yeah, >> right. So I have re-triggered uh the CI. So let's say hopefully it will get merged this time. Sure. We'll take a look at it after some time. Uh in the meantime, uh the author of 141 has responded back suggesting that this is an EIP according to him. Um, I'm not sure if he would like to go for another review just yet or maybe later, but just wanted to give you a heads up of that.

I have shared the link with the author so in case he is around he can join the call. I mean, I'm not sure why this particular

these features can't be implemented in uh in the smart contract itself. So >> I wonder what's Sam thinks about it. Uh like should we keep it as an EIP proposal or >> um sorry I haven't been following this one at all. Uh it's so this is a token that exists if it's a contract it's an ERC 10.

So I'll drop a command asking that the author should specify why the what is the feature set that he expects L1 uh clients to implement and why it's not uh implementable by a smart contract. >> Exactly. Yeah, that's a great idea. So I was looking into the 1207. It seems

like it is still waiting for the review of Yam. I am not so sure like Yoham is not um not an editor. He is a reviewer and he is not also part of the um proposal. Should what should bot wait for his review just because it was requested? Just curious to understand the process here. Bot is not waiting for anyone. Bot says that it is trying to perform automatic merge and currently continuous integration bot is running and uh once it finishes hopefully it should get merged.

>> Okay, if that's so then it is very good. All right, let's move on. I mean some there are many there are many PRs on which uh we need to sort of retrigger the bot somehow for it to uh it gets stuck some way and uh we need to retrigger it for it to merge even when there is nothing uh that is stopping the merge. Yeah, I don't know if this needs any kind of update because it would be like challenging to go back to each and every PR making sure that it is not blocked by anything just we need to re-trigger it.

>> I mean it would be possible to run a GitHub action every so often that just scans all the PRs and tries to rerun the bot on them. Um, that's not a bad idea. >> Sure. Uh, should we create an issue for this particular action, GitHub action? >> Yeah, I can do that right now. >> Okay, cool. Uh, on this uh PR9936 SAM, uh, does this look okay to you? I think it's just upgrading the version of configure pages. So if this looks okay with you, I can just give the thumbs up

right here. >> Uh yeah, should be fine. Yeah. >> Yeah. Because it required only reviewers input. Uh so I had added it for two subsequent editing office hour. Good that we can close it right here. >> I suppose we should make sure that it um there's no breaking changes between 3 and 5. Um configure. So, it still requires one more review, I guess. Uh, >> yeah, I'll prevent one sec. >> Yep.

[Music] I suppose the following one the 9963 also has similar ask here. It requires for three different piles requires approval from editors set only and requires two uh two editors approval.

Okay. So, the author is trying to add uh Ethereum uh icon and uh it looks fine to me. What do you say, Sam? Sorry, I'm just recreating that last pull request on um Yeah, that's good. And then we have like the favorite kind looks good. Yeah, that looks fine. I'm happy with that.

[Music] Next one we can go with 9 2 4 3. It seems that the author has already approved [Music] but still it is not merged. So author has not really approved. He's saying he's waiting for one more review. H um so here like because this is run by bot and bot suggests that it requires

only one review from the list of authors. So that review that had oh because he left a comment and did not mark it approve. Got it. >> No he did not uh approve it. He's saying that uh he wants one more review. >> Okay. Good. Here

author does not seems to be approving the PR because this is for a typo. So perhaps we can close it or force merge it. Um editor's choice. >> I mean typos it it doesn't look good to have typos. So I would be inclined to force merge it. >> Mhm. >> Same here. [Music]

[Music] I mean, it's quite weird that author reviewed the PR and uh declined it. I mean it's easier to just approve Yeah, if the proposal is not stagnant or with a drone, I suppose making edits and fixing the typo makes sense.

And the last one here, 100035, seems like a spam. Please take a look. >> Okay, sorry. >> It's already been deleted. >> The spam. Okay, cool. I think and that's it for today's we do have over 180 open PRs. Um I'm looking into ways how we can filter it further but it seems like uh most of the PRs are either waiting on author's approval or a type of fix for withdrawn or stagnant proposals. I have already included most of the PRs from the project board here. Um so so I think we should increase the number

of the uh PRs which are shown in the PR board. As of now it is only 30 or 35 but we have 180 plus. So if we can order it right would be nice to have this list created and we can look into it. I mean uh generally if basically if we have some typo even for the withdrawn or stagnant I generally tend to merge in but most of the times it generally requires force merge because if the PR is for example if the EIP is in stagnant then it has been a long time and our rules have really evolved over time. So uh that is basically the only hurdle in

merging those uh type of PRs. Generally I tend to approve them but they require force merge for those scenarios. >> Mhm. >> I'll look into adding you as um a maintainer um because you're active enough that I think it makes sense. Um >> Sam's got >> right while we have you here Sam I was wondering the project board that was initially created uh did it have any kind of limitation uh that it does not include all the proposal. I was wondering if there is a

way to have all >> it only in it only includes proposals that are waiting for an editor. uh but this this seems like very small number if you look into EIPS inside I think that is only 20 to 30 at the max and the open PRs are 180 plus so is it all we are waiting on authors to respond >> it's entirely possible that there are bugs in it >> okay >> um it was kind of like a weekend project >> oh no >> yeah if you have an example of a PR that's waiting for an editor that is not in the list um just shoot me a link to it I'll take a look.

>> Sure. I will look into that and share with you. >> Cool. With this, it seems like we are good for today. Next Tuesday, um on July 29th, we will have another EIP editing office hour for EIP plus ERC uh led by Victor Zhao. Um and hopefully we will be looking into more ERC related proposal because EIP list is always smaller. So thank you everyone for tuning in and thank you editors for joining us here.

See you all around. >> Thank you. [Music] Heat. Heat. N. [Music] Oh yeah.