EIPIP Meeting 64

Transcript

welcome to eipip meeting 64. i have shared agenda in chat i have tried to uh list items as per our general uh discussion that is there in discord channel and also in the eips github repository so the first item for discussion today is discuss guidelines for requires and changes in eip process and eip1 so let me quickly give a little background about why required so requires came across in one of the issues that we were reviewing yesterday in eip editors office r and there was this

question that sometimes authors get confused like what to put in eips requires section like which particular erp should be added as required and when it is that it is mandatory to be added as requires so yeah i'll be curious to hear thoughts from eip editors i know sam has already shared some but sam if you would like to summarize a little bit more here and then we can probably take some input from matt sure so um the requires header there are two kind of opposing viewpoints on it um the viewpoint that i have is that the requires header is where you list eips that you have to read before you can

understand or implement the current eip and the other camp is that the requires header should list all eips that you mention in your eip whether or not they are just context or are required reading awesome so it looks like uh there are two major points so if any proposal is needed just to understand to work on the new proposal as an eip that can be and another one if there is any mention of it like any kind of dependency on the other proposal matt i wonder if you have different thoughts or if you would like to add any

other point that an author should consider while adding proposals to ei eip's require section what does eip1 say that's a very good point sorry i'm frothing some milk and look at it at this exact moment uh it says eips may have a requires header indicating the eip numbers that this eip depends on i mean we can be like pedantic on the wording or we can just you know elaborate more but i feel like depends is what sam is saying

like you have to understand this eap to implement the um eip that is required or like i mean i don't know i'm not even sure understanding is the bar i think like it has to utilize something from that eit whether it's like a concept or a specific technical aspect of it i don't think that we should be listing the eips that i just mentioned this is any way an optional field like an author can add or not add but yeah if we go by the present description in eip1 it looks more like

eips on which it is dependent well the optional part of that is we don't have very good granularity like it's an optional field but it should be required if the eap actually does depend on vip oh that makes sense sorry about the confusion thank you for clarifying so i hope that will be documented and notes for this meeting so going forward if there is this kind of confusion we can probably refer to it and uh just for general people listening to this call uh whatever is documented in eip1 is is correct and that's what it literally means so please try to follow that

all right um the next one here is um changes in eip process and eip1 so in the last meeting we were discussing about uh some changes and the pull request number was a 5463 however it uh seemed like it was not given enough time for discussion so the pull request is reopened with a new number that is 5533 and yeah um if we can probably discuss on general guidelines however i try to document some of the decisions from the past eib editors meeting in the apprentice handbook

but we can have a general guideline for people to refer to sam i know you have reopened the pull request if you would like to maybe provide a a brief intro of that and we can probably discuss it oh uh yeah so the previous pull request added an adoptable field um and um so the adoptable field is kind of like a signal to editors that says if the author isn't responsive we are allowed or encouraged to assign it to a new author at our discretion um it's not my proposal i kind of on the fence about it like i am

with a lot of these things i i think it's a little bit extra to add this field so you can just make a new eip and you know make yourself the author on it um where on the other hand it's nice to be able to like ensure some continuity between eip numbers and um yeah so you know i'm a little torn on it and it was my bad for merging the first pr without getting rough consensus among editors so i reverted it and opened this this new one to discuss um since panda pip isn't here i'm not sure if we'll actually be able to debate very well that is right i totally understand that i think in general like uh um it's my uh understanding that in general we can or we should keep any discussion open

for at least two eipab meetings so we get to uh share the information with the eap editors because sometimes some of the editors may miss their discussion so yeah um matt if you have anything to add on this particular proposal the adoptable one or in general you want to talk anything about the process um i i just think that we need to leave things open for a fairly long time if editors disagree definitely for a couple eip meetings we should discuss it synchronously if there's disagreement before

merging and i mean just generally waiting for you know mostly consensus uh among the editors or at least the editors who are active and i don't think that we should have the adoptable field so it's my take yeah one other thing that i would like to make a mention of generally in case of any changes to eip1 uh earlier we were having like two editors approval but now we have like around five editors available so it will be nice to have minimum three editors on board and get that approval done i'm not sure if this is already added in the part and it is

taken care of but if not i think that would be a good idea there's also like a general courtesy i think that we haven't merged too many things in the past where editors disagreed even if we had two editors unless the editor who disagreed said i'm not gonna block this like there is does seem to be a bit of veto power amongst single editors if they think a change is bad i don't want to like encode that but i think that it's like a reasonable courtesy to not just uh just merge things after two even if somebody has already said they're pretty against it yeah that was entirely my bad like i um it's entirely my fault um like panda pip

has been adding eips to a manual merge like uh list because some of them require it and i didn't realize that we didn't have consensus on this one so that's entirely my battery i mean it's all good it happens there's a lot of vips to go through yeah i guess i'm just saying i don't think you know um the process is wrong i think i just implemented it incorrectly yeah there's not regimes i think panda pip has also merged a few things recently that didn't really have everybody's agreement or like didn't go through the correct process and so it's useful just to say again um yeah in general i have noticed a huge

spike in number of comments going on in the repository and if they look into the um insight eaps inside report that i generally share um it's like up i don't know maybe over 20 times or close to 30 times i don't know it's very very high which is not a bad thing because we are trying to improve process but i feel like for certain decisions which is like not that easy and we definitely should have consensus of eip editors we can probably wait for some time and uh give it enough time for ap editors to provide feedback

um unfortunately panda pipe is not here we would love to hear what he thinks about it and probably be considerate and future and merging all these proposals yeah i mean it's awesome the stuff that panapec has been adding i think we haven't had someone who like understands the process and is able to do as much work in the ci this is able to do so it's great but i'm getting worried that everything is changing and we can end up in a situation where you know if panda pip stops editing then we don't understand how this some of the things work whereas like in the past

people like the editors have sort of known or like the thing is so old that we've been working with it for years uh you know um as a newer editor i never had any idea how the build system works so this is a no change for me okay um but i think most of the changes have been pretty reasonable like i've tried to be reviewing most of them just to keep on top of them and um like it's mostly non-critical things like the labels and um like some of the merge rules and those kind of things and i think those those changes are like they're not part of the core approval process like it doesn't matter if it has the right tag so i think we can afford to be a little fast

and loose with them but um i would like to start stabilizing the build system again and and you know cut down on the number of changes yeah i agree yeah totally there i know a lot of things is uh being uh bot driven now we are talking about bots and we have recently made some changes in words as well so we can definitely expect a lot of comments going on into the repository which is again not a bad thing it's a good thing to happen but at the same time discussing it in these meetings or may be able to document it somewhere else will help other people to follow along and maybe community to like follow after whenever they would

like to refer it to so yeah that's all good thank you sam thank you cannabi and yeah thank you matt for um sharing your thoughts over here all right um i i think it's safe to move on to the next item so the next item is a eip bots related discussion updates agreement on merging ps and closing generally i keep this item [Music] on number three after the github issues and pull requests but we are not getting enough time to discuss this item so on requester for say uh this has been pumped up um we will get into the either spotting issues but before that um

there is a one pr which is five five zero eight that is to upgrade eap bot to eip review i just wanted to share it with editors uh if they have any comment concern with that it looks like um it is a change for the eip bot so yeah any thoughts any comments and if not then probably um you can um check it review the quotes and yeah if needed much as i wanted to just share so uh this should not be blocked for very

long time yeah just for curiosity i i cannot find the 5508 in the in the pools the eip request maybe i don't know maybe you just come share the link whatever whenever you want or can that would be great thank you i got it yep i just shared cool um this is just for attention uh but in other than that jose did you wanted to share any update or

anything in specific you wanted to discuss on this topic well just just to let the basically son know that if you have the time i agree with panda pip to take care of the issues 95 63 and 34 from the eip board so if i just don't want to that was something that i was briefly talking to him i just don't want to get into something that someone else is working on suddenly you know so if you have the time the time sign i really appreciate that you

you take a look in the issues oh yeah which one's sorry you're in the eip repository you said 93 no 95 63 and 34. okay 95. sorry i'll just open this up now and i'll take a look at them um that's okay thank you 95 63 and what was the last one 34 34. okay yeah sorry i'll take a look at those today thank you i appreciate it that's it from my side very well thank you so much i think that also

covers the second point which was related to issues and pull requests um moving on this is from general github issues and pull request there were two issues added in the past two two weeks one is make eips website a pwa it's a proposal by panda peep and he wants to volunteer um unfortunately there is no plan shared but yeah wondering if anyone has any comments [Music] if not i think

pwa oh yeah issue number is five six zero eight let me show you here what does pwa stand for progressive web application i think i think we shouldn't do that i don't think we need to like if you want to browse it offline just download the repo um yeah but you know i mean in a perfect world it would be cool but at the same time again i don't want to add more things that can break that we have to fix

that's a fair point all right so yeah i mean i wanted to bring it up because we have mentioned that we will be talking about issues which are there it's good to collect some thoughts on a separate note um i have shared it in the past as well and i want to mention it again uh that i have put together a small team of aspiring ethereum developers like they are not developers as of now they are aspiring developers to create a dashboard for either chart but that is at present would not be a part of eip's github repository however this is an experiment i'm trying to do it um on on a different uh github once it's successful i will like to come back and

propose it if people find it interesting we can probably add it with less maintenance of course and yeah if anyone has any suggestions on any other charts or dashboards that you would like to see on top of whatever is already existing in eips inside hackmd please uh share it with me i will try to have that incorporated the next issue here is advocate for eip editors to clearly explain the current external policy to new authors i know this is like repetitive we have

we have discussed about at multiple time and the proposal is also not on the call but anything that any of the apa readers would like to mention again on external link policies i mean it's in it's in eip1 links to external authors should not be included external resources may disappear move or change unexpectedly i think that covers the current external links policy pretty well um maybe we should be more polite when we're expressing it in prs but that is pretty clear right well it actually says should which they should not be an eip yeah that's what i said should not

well i don't think that's that clear though like there's no definition of should like that seems like it's up to the editor to decide but the system does not allow you to have blanks yeah without like overriding epw um yeah but if you already w then like it's not a one and done like every time they edit eve now they have to get written yeah yeah sucks i have an issue open on ew for um somehow giving like eap editors the ability to override specific errors i just i i haven't really thought about how to do that yet so sure do you have the number handy sam maybe

we can uh try to reach out to community if anyone is interested taking a look at it maybe well it's not specified yet um like here i'll get the link here it's um yeah i mean and that would be nice we can probably share it in our next catalyst calls as well if anyone is interested to make contribution they would be there but yeah summarizing this current external link policy the policy is same as that is listed on eip1 and there is no change so please follow uh what is listed there

we can definitely expand it though like do we want to say something more like um you know unless there's very specific circumstances or um we can definitely be more clear about it all right i think in that case maybe a pull request with the revised words would be better and there we can collect more thoughts sounds good awesome and thank you for sharing the issue number here next one is pull request i have listed three pull requests none of these are eip related but it looks like small changes into process and some of the

internal file that that is helpful so if we can discuss this quickly that is fine first one is 5572 this is for a fixing index html issue anyone has any objection maybe quickly want to take a look yeah i can go through this after the meeting that sounds good uh so there are three um pull requests uh i'm just a sharing number five five seven two

five five eight six and five five nine six um if other editors may take a look it looks like that needs some kind of approval or merging yeah please feel free to do that uh next one is from the past meetings discussion continued um it is i think from the adoptable yeah 5533 and we have discussed it so probably we can skip this one and move on to the next one that is eip's insight i am trying to open the link here quickly so in the month of september we have

received one final eip okay and other than that we have received nine erc's as draft and the one i'm so sorry about it for some reason my computer is lagging and two eips in review status so the eip which is in final status is eip3525 semi fungible token congratulations to the team for reaching out to the finance status and the eaps into review statuses are eip 5216 and eip 5484 please check out the link in the agenda

for details of all these eavs next one is eap editing office hour we had eap editing office our first meeting yesterday and the recording is added to the agenda this was very interesting in terms of like this is the first time we were inviting all authors to come forward to share their questions comments concerns related to the eip process or anything that they are facing uh in documentation of the process we were also looking into some of the new eips plus the eips which are getting into last call or maybe in the final statuses so if you are an author with an

active proposal in the eips github repository and if you have questions you want to reach out to eip editor i think that is the best one for you to reach out to the next meeting is planned on september 20 at 1500 utc you can find details on ethereum cathartis discard so that's about it so that's the new apprentice like meeting the new name for apprentice so the apprentice meeting was for people who were interested in becoming eip editor and obviously there would be some learning which can be useful for people interested in becoming editor but

this is generally to invite authors eip authors who are trying to document a proposal to make it an ethereum standard we are receiving as you can see this month only in in past seven days we have received nine ercs as draft merged as draft so um these authors if they are facing any challenges they are invited to reach out to us and we will be happy to support moving their proposal towards final okay so for the youtube channel we will you guys have the a new series of like a playlist or uh will be the same as the apprentice yeah i remember creating it yesterday may i may have missed it making it public but definitely i'll do that today

so yes there will be a new playlist it will be uh it is known as eip editing office hour and all the meetings from this point forward will be added in that so yeah it will be easier for you to just follow one playlist and you can get all the meetings okay thank you thank you um next one is a review action items from the previous meeting i know uh we discussed about eip number but i'm not sure if there is any progress on that anyone has any information or update on them all right looks like this is still open

um so we will keep it that way just wondering if this has been added as an issue on any of the github repository sorry matt you were trying to say something i saw you unmuted i know uh panda pip was talking about adding it to their bot um but i'm not sure whether they're at so far okay i'll take a look and if it is not added in the eip pod github repository i will make sure to create a new issue for this and what license to use for eip assets

looks like i'm blanking did we make any decision on this i remember discussing this topic anyone remembers that i don't know if we made a decision yet i think i'm kind of being stubborn about wanting other things then just cc0 and is there any action item like anyone can help support get that thing done or do we want to have it added in the next meeting i think keep it on the next meeting it's probably a good idea um i know a lot of people feel strongly about this so

okay then i will move it on to the next meeting um well that's all looks like added on the agenda today anyone else want to bring anything looks like we are having some time if anyone has any point to discuss we can probably check it if not i i think it's an early release for all editors as well thank you everyone for joining us today hope to see you in two weeks have a good one everyone see you and thanks for hosting good thank you

bye