EIP Editing Office Hour #90 (EIP + ERC)

Transcript

[music] Wonderful. >> [music]

>> Thank you. >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat.

Heat. >> boarding in progress.

>> Welcome to EIP editing office hour meeting number 90. This is issue number 1933 on Ethereum/PM GitHub repository. In this meeting, we are going to go over PRs on EIP as well as ERC's repositories. Proposals are added to be moved into different statuses. And we are joined by editor Sam Wilson. Welcome Sam. Thank you for joining us here. It's my pleasure. >> All right. Uh we are also joined by a few authors and uh I believe some of them have also posted their question.

Maybe we can begin with uh the ERC PR544 and we are joined by author Jiron. He may have some questions. >> Sure. Let's take a look. Do you have any specific questions or just want to review? >> No, just a review of things. >> Sure. Can do? >> Okay. The pending safe period of time controls

have no way to trade for the portion to another address for users who need to migrate wallets. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. Good motivation. Um, and transfers the entire deposit request balance from old control to new

controller request. Must the pending balance clear must not be affected must decrease the transferred amount deposit. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. Center must be old controller or other operator approved by old controller must have been the [sighs] Yep. Yeah, it was just to like be consistent

with 7540. because this otherwise you said something in the two comments before you said something about like also put back ticks around the codes. Yeah. So this is a function name.

>> Uh so just put it in back text. >> What do you mean by that? Put code snippets in header. Oh, you just mean this one. Okay. Yeah. You mean every kind of code function name in in a header should have back. Okay. Got it. Yeah. Thanks. >> Yeah. I mean any code anywhere in the document should be in back text, but specifically in headers here. Um, sign, why did you change colors? >> That's a good question.

>> Yeah, it usually means there's a syntax error somewhere, but it could also just mean nothing. So, for sure, >> it's not. >> Oddly enough, it's not in my editor. like PS it doesn't show normally try So, this is a dumb question and I know

nothing about any of this, but is is there any reason why you you don't mint these uh redeem requests as like ERC20s or something and then you can transfer them with that? >> That would be like a label on top. Uh it makes a lot of sense. That's the goal actually. Like the idea is that you can transfer it into like an operator contract or a browser contract and that could mint like a probably more like an NFT I would say because well I mean either to be honest I think ideally actually a 699 token but that's a different discussion but yeah that would be a layer on top 100%. >> Cool.

Yeah. So this is great. Um if I go and do that one that's good. I was typing along so I just push commence fixing your comments. >> Oh, if you want. Yeah, I can I can do it from here if you want. >> Oh, that works. >> Yeah. Oh, unless it's not editable for Yeah, it's not editable for me. So, you'll

have to do it. >> I'll click the buttons now. >> But isn't there functions that like commits multiple in? >> Yeah, if you go to the files change tab, you can add them all from there. Okay. one to go.

Yes, perfect. I clicked update branch to update the main. Sorry. >> No, no, it's fine. Cool.

>> All right. Thank you. >> Oh, no problem. Thanks for coming out. >> All right. Have a good day. Thanks, guys. Where are we off to next, Puja? So, >> we have a few final proposals. Maybe we can look into that and then we have few more drafts to be looked into. See if there are any more discussions. Nope. All right.

Still in royalty distribution for affordable. Still with multiple packages. >> This seems like a big change. 712 721 line number 30 31. >> Yeah, that makes sense though. 7 721 is NFTTS and 712 is signatures. So >> yeah. Yeah, >> makes sense. Where's sale price to find anything?

Yeah, that's a to reference depth.

Yeah, I think I'm just gonna All right.

7 8 93. [sighs and gasps] Okay. Let's go check the discussion thread. It's a lot of discussion. Um okay interface protocol verify soft through smart contracts. This interface works with defining structure datac price feeds tracking and the technical calculates ratios using configurable risk thresholds maintains historical metrics for trend analysis and

destruction defense upon threshold breaches. SVGs. Let's see how those look. That's 78 93. Yeah, those look nice. Good.

That one's a little big, but no big deal. Okay. Okay. The interface All

right. I mean, [clears throat] I guess that's fine. Um, next we have got a bunch of PRs which are ready for review and we are joined by the author as well. Sure. Um, let's >> look. Yeah, looks good. Um

Okay, then we have minimal agent registry. Let's go and take a look at that. Okay, good.

minute. So, 6 69 80 48 6948 Nothing.

Okay. And then we wanted human readable token identifiers. We have quite a few today. >> That's all right. A lot of them are getting merged, so that makes me happy. >> Yep. Right. No, that's not and a fringe.

[gasps] Okay, that's fine.

Unless Then we're on to smart credential

resolution interface. in space. There isn't space. Okay. [clears throat]

So, that is all of those. We can go back to here. Did we do this one already? >> We have a few miscellaneous one. I believe those would be shorter. Finish them up. >> Perfect. Let's do that. Okay. So, this one doesn't need a review for me. Um, this one does need a review for me. What is this? Complete to-dos 7039.

I haven't read this one in quite some time. Um, >> yeah, it looks like they're just waiting to finish up with todos and then get the proposal merged. >> I mean, this is my proposal. This is weird. using the icon URI from provider info. It's

That is fun. [laughter] >> Cool. So that's 7039 7702. I >> I believe you're author as well there, right? So >> proxy contracts not sure I understand message that sender was tx.org origin because the top So the next one is my proposal and I

have question. I'm not understanding what am I missing there. It's saying some error um maybe the execution specs um file that I have referred but I'm unable to understand it. Oh yeah, you just have to replace this with a commit instead of master. Um uh I have taken this link from Tim's proposal of u where he kind of like put all the missing meta into one file. So I'm not sure like why is that different like I I have just

taken let me tell you the EIP number. >> Sure. >> Uh 7568. So whatever file number was mentioned here I use the exact same one like the same link. Yeah. So, he has a commit in the uh the URL. That would be why.

>> Okay. So, I just need to add the commit number. >> Okay. Maybe then I definitely missed on something. I'm going to fix it right away. Uh other than that, do you see any other error that will be >> uh this one here? The reason to stop it. Um BA I have a question.

>> Yes please. Um so basically everything is started from discussion in magicians and then secondly if you if the idea is going well and people discuss it they will write some EIP and ERC for it from the atm. Is that correct? >> Mhm. Oh, and um so when people already do some couple of PR on the the repos like open PR and link it with your magician magician

discussions and some will be coming into the review in this weekly meeting. >> Yes. Is that correct? Oh, okay. >> So, what's the different cycle on um the status on and draft into the final one? >> Um maybe Sam can explain it. >> Yeah, sure. Um so, if you haven't yet already, you should read EIP1. It kind of describes the whole process. Uh, but the general idea is you um make your pull request to create your draft and you can leave stuff out. It's it's pretty like flexible what what you need.

Um, and then once you're done, so you've filled out all the sections, you feel like you're reason it's reasonably complete, uh, but not in a final form, you open a poll request to move it into the review status. >> Okay. Um, when you're in review, you go out and find people who would be interested in using your standard. So, let's say you, you know, you were writing a standard about NFTts. Uh, you probably, you know, talk to people from the OpenC community, for example, or or if you're doing something with vaults or or ERC20 tokens, you'd want to talk to DeFi. So, you go out and find people to read it, uh, get reviews. Uh once you are satisfied as the author that your proposal has received enough reviews,

last call. Um that's like a usually a two week period for any final comments that anybody might have about your proposal. Uh assuming that there's no like showstopping changes that happen. Uh after the twoe period, you open a poll request to move it into final. And then once it gets to final, it can no longer be edited. Okay. Okay. We'll explain. Thank you, Sam. >> Oh, my pleasure. I hope that's clear. I don't know if it

is. >> Uh it is just one question here Sam. Is it fine because uh if we follow the process then here rational is going to be a a bit longer than usually we see it in EIP because >> Yeah, that's fine. >> Perfect. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. I don't see anything else wrong. It's just I think moving around the um the specification and the Yeah.

>> And oh and the links. Yeah. >> We'll do that. I know we are at time Sam but uh if you get a chance please take a look at triple 182. It was earlier approved by Gajender Singh but uh was stopped by the bot so I tried to figure it out but it seems like it is not working my end. So um again it seems like something is missing there as well. So if you could >> there's weird. Okay. Um, what's wrong with this?

>> No, I think it might be just because you moved it to draft and then back. Yeah. >> Yeah. Um, I mean like um it was not working. Then Victor suggested that if you close your PR and reopen then the bot would run again. So I tried to do that. Uh but it did not work out. So moving it into draft clears approvals but closing and opening it doesn't. >> Ah okay. >> I think yeah I I'll I'll approve it. >> Yep. Thank you so much. >> Take care everyone.

Heat. Heat.