EIPIP Meeting 90

Transcript

welcome to eipip meeting 90. this is issue number 271 on eipip GitHub repository I have shared agenda in chat we have pretty light agenda for today we have discussed open issues full requests discussion continued and updates from the past meeting monthly Insight a little bit about EIP editing office hour so starting from the very first item um I have added a pull request here which is uh seven double six five it is about website removing networking and interface categories it seems that uh

there are a lot of discussion on the on this particular pull request and uh and uh we are still not having a concrete decision I would love for someone to maybe summarize this and let people know where we are on this I also see a um another call for input a similar call for input for making decision I'm going to wait till the date is there but yeah if anyone would like to summarize it and explain where we are um I can't summarize in depth why but um I can give a little overview

so I think it's because um having a network is a separate category doesn't really make that much sense from like a process perspective networking changes will often go through a lot of the same um like decisions and then they have all the same people as core eips so merging them with core eips makes some sense and then the interface category we have kind of pushed it off to the execution apis repository so getting rid of the category um might encourage people to stop making new ones that's kind of my understanding but um yeah it's it's Panda Pep's proposal so I don't really want to speak on his behalf

I just don't understand why we can't leave them there and deprecate them yeah I think we can I don't think it's that big of an issue that kind of just keeps saying that we cannot do this it's not possible and we're just like making these things up well I think uh historically speaking Korea is where a part of upgrade and moving uh an interface on networking to the list of core EIP doesn't feel right to me as as an individual so I'll be

more in favor of like letting it live where it is but there should not be any further new uh proposal we can just replicate that category exactly so there is another call for input as I mentioned open for the specific discussion and I hope to get some consensus over there the deadline suggested October I mean they will not just get consensus I don't understand there's three of us here I don't know how Greg felt about it but

it seemed like none of us are in favor uh so I'm not in favor of doing anything until we figure out like the ERC EIP split and whatever we end up doing with with working groups um I I do think putting networking and Decor makes some amount of sense just because um like the way I kind of envisioned core is anything that can cause main net to Fork so if you if you implement networking differently enough you'll end up forking if you implement like the evm differently you'll end up forking so that's why I put them together into their own working group but until then I don't want to like until we have working groups and the ERC EIP split I don't

want to mess around with anything I'm more or less I agree with Sam and Lakeland over here basically we can leave it untouched for now and my opinion is maybe over the time we can see more of them as tags rather than categories basically have fuzzy kind of a thing where you can tag like you can have multiple tags on an EIP and sort of you know mix have sort of say that this has impact on these X number of areas yeah that makes sense too okay but I don't mean we're not going to go back and change the eaps that exist

though is the thing yeah I'm finding that so I I would just like to leave the eaps as they are as artifacts not accept new ones and we can figure out the working group I mean the tags is nice but I don't want to Retro retroactively update all these networking eaps nor do I think we should move them because then we're going to break links yeah I think breaking links is we're not going to break links well we can make that a rule but um like if there's a like if we change

the rendering system so that it it uses tags for example then I think it makes sense to update everything that way we don't have to maintain two different rendering systems but that's a discussion for when we update the rendering system so I wonder Greg if you have any thoughts on this um sorry you may be on mute Greg oh I'm muted instead of unmuted I I I'm still way too hammered by this move to

have been thinking about any of it uh unfortunately um but I I would tend to think that the networking stuff really is core stuff even though it isn't directly part of the protocol um if it's important at all it generally has to do with networking with I'm sorry uh I'm not coherent today I mean I don't disagree with people that networking is very core thing but we just don't use eaps for Network anymore so it's not really a debate about will we in the future have more eips in this

networking category should future eips related to networking B and core be in networking be in a core tag with networking like we're just we don't have networking IPS so it's a question about what to do with old eips that are networking category oh just leave them alone they're existing that's how they were categorized there's nothing to do with them but leave them that way so if we uh try to like split it into topics there are two topics of discussion number one what to do with the older EIP and it seems like most of

the people on the call they are okay to let it live the way it was living and the next question is like should we have any further uh networking or interface VIPs in future and if we do we might need a working group it seems like we may not need yeah I mean I think that's something that we can figure out in the future I think we should focus on coming up with the working group for core changes as we Define core to be today and if at some point in the future people desire to write eips related to networking then we can cross the bridge but I don't want to try and you know figure this out ahead of time before we really know what

people want that makes sense and hopefully uh this is the right time to maybe even Define core and uh based on the definition of core maybe we can have people for co-working grow and uh yeah yeah I mean core to me is something that modifies the consensus protocol perfect so if we have to uh move on from here

um I'm trying to just move on from the first item that was PR number 765 seems like um we want to leave where we are and moving from here if we have to Define that the different categories like the core and the ERC I believe will be the two major categories for which we might need a working group I have a proposal I don't know if this is fair or not but um just want to share it with people here do we really need to keep the category can we redefine them as type so like earlier we have one standard track and we have four different categories over there it creates confusion and when we are

trying to organize the EIP types categories and the process as a whole what do people think about instead of calling it standard track ERC we just call them our VRC standard track core as just core and meta and informational um yeah I think that that generally makes sense I'm I'm still kind of fleshing out some of the details on working groups but um that's kind of what they look it's just like you have just working groups a core working group like in eip's like meta governance working group

and then that's it that's pretty much all the categorization we have the reason for uh the proposal is like I really do not see a relevance of all these like you know proposals being a part of the standard track type so they can live independently and I think that would be easier for communication purposes as well yeah that makes sense to me okay um anything more on this item before we move on can we close this remove networking

interface categories that's a good call hold request number seven double what do people think point point of order um we can't close it until we get input from exec consensus we don't because access hasn't presented an opinion yet guys this is insanity guys it's already rough consensus like the majority of us already agreed let's

do this why are we I mean we're just gonna waste a bunch of time like now we're gonna rediscus this three more times Asics removal expires in about 15 days so that's the real deadline yeah true yeah yeah Sam if you could maybe explain what happened majority or any decision um on any decision items by the um it's um like every editor is entitled to their opinion so everybody gets to say you know what they think um if they don't answer within 30 days

from the call for input then uh whatever the consensus is at the 30 days from the call for input is the decision so it isn't a vote it's still rough consensus and each decision is is limited to 30 days at most so if we do not have absolute favor or uh denial we will go by like rough consensus like whatever is majority we will get there right uh yeah so it's like um uh so here we're going to be we are electing somebody as keeper of consensus which is kind of like you know just a person who determines what the rough consensus is

um and when it's been reached then um yeah that's what if that person says there's a consensus that's been reached then the decision has been made as long as everybody has the opportunity to you know give their input sounds good so um do we want to like when the deadline is met do we want to just bring those items on eipip meeting just to communicate the decision to the community or will it just be close in the issue what do you think will be the right I mean we can definitely talk about it on eipip I don't have a problem with

that sounds good all right uh I think we should perhaps wait till deadline of the discussion item and we'll bring it after fourth no Fifth Fifth of October anything else on this one all right let's move on to item number two which is a discussion continued or updates from past meeting

uh so I see EAP 5069 uh that has incorporated Charter staff and it is added as meta it explains what are the mission structure membership decision making process everything else I wonder if there are any further things that uh we would like to communicate um or do we need to update it any further very well so that's there uh there are people

coming up on this card for questions around what EIP editors can or cannot do for those people I highly recommend following EAP 5069 that explains what is expected by them and what uh authors should be performing on their own foreign okay next one is from the past meeting so the item for discussion was considered adopting a community specification license term for the new ERC Depot and we were expecting some updates from I suppose it was from Victor and I

believe Vector is not on the call today but he draw some comment here on the diff card it suggests that um copyright license for ERC left Depot thinking of pc0 plus Apache 2.0 dual license and that's what it's from his side anyone else has any other information to add here licenses suck at it don't ever want to talk about and I think we learned about a new license type yesterday as well was that a new license type or just a body managing standardization

foreign yes yes I think in the last meeting um EAP editing office hour we came across a new something new I may have been missing never mind all right uh so that's the only update shared by Victor and um yeah we can move on to the next one next one was uh updating EAP 721 I suppose uh the decision made on the last call was if there is no objection we can merge The Proposal after two weeks and it's

more than two weeks so I was just wondering if it is good to merge the pr number is 7550 yeah I think I'm okay to merge this still okay cool so we'll Market that and yeah whenever you get a chance please merge that the next one is EIP ERC GitHub repositories uh so I see proposal 7329 ERC EIP repository split a meta proposal

by Matt and Deno is now is in the final status um I wanted to bring it to the agenda to maybe figure out what are the next steps from here when we are expecting this repo split is there any new PR or maths initial PR still hold good or anything that we would like to share with the community in form of announcement or updates on this Matt would we need to rerun your script to update the EIP I mean the pr

I mean definitely but this isn't really something I think we can just like do on our own like we need to sit on a call with panda and Sam and you know spend two hours and really just urge it and do this do the split in because I don't think that the pr is perfect we can um schedule the call I'll send out an invite or something this week can we uh like uh expect the call in between the next EAP call and today so

we can have some updates for the next meeting and I can put it up on this and therefore yeah for sure I'll try to get it scheduled like either this week or next so that would be great thank you we do have Greg on the call although he mentioned that his connections keeps dropping I wanted to uh check about the pr 7230 Greg uh that a pull request by you about EIP pain relief do we still want to discuss that do you want to close it where we are on that

um pieces of it are showing up in this other work and I'm not sure what status to put it in it's not exactly withdrawn um I guess it's just a PR so it can sit there um yeah I think I'm pretty close to satisfied that what's in there is is making it in to the the various decisions we're making but it would take some review but like I said the moves a horror show and my girlfriend's health is has been collapsing stage by stage so unfortunately I just

have not been able to give this any attention at a fairly crucial time and all I can do is apologize for that um no worries I hope things get better at your time um just curious um if you find some of the pain points are being addressed with other pull requests there could be two possible options if you do not want to continue with this full request you can close it perhaps otherwise we can keep it open but if unattended for over two months or so but may strike and it can go into stamen and eventually get close

so yeah totally open for that but if it is not something that you would want me to bring on the next meeting I can perhaps drop it from the agenda for the next meeting onwards the next meeting two weeks out uh that's right let me briefly look at my calendar you know gosh um I don't think there's any other conferences happening man um

um well there was going to be but I'm not going to be able to make it to that one yeah I mean it could just be closed the information is there and no it's not going to get merged as it stands um so it can just be closed um because open or close the information is still there so we will market for today's decision that PR number 7230 will be closed yeah it's just like I say it's it's ideas for things that I wanted to see changed but those changes are happening in pieces in other places and it really couldn't even

be merged uh the way it is now without a lot of work um right I'm glad we are at a better place when this PR was only originally drafted all right moving on to the next one is eapf inside for eips inside of the month of September as I can see we have a huge number of um Eid is moving in we have 20 draft 12 review 11 proposal in last call five proposals are final and 16 proposals are in

stagnant status um 60 is a big number for proposals moving into stagnant we understand that is because of proposal being unattended for a long period of time I would take this opportunity to maybe request EIP authors if you are here if you are making a pull request to create an standard for ethereum ecosystem please stick around if you have questions we do have EIP editing office hour that happens every other Tuesday please check out eipip GitHub repository issue section for the next meeting and please come up there with your

questions you can add your PR for discussion and we have Pip editor Samuels and they're answering your questions in case you need any help push your proposal to what they funnel status um we can check out eipsinsite.com with details of all eits in different statuses proposals in last call we request EIT authors to make a pull request after the deadline is completed to move the proposal to the final status be sure that the pr contains only the status change if there are more changes with the pull request we would like to

review it and perhaps we can extend the review period so we get everything sorted before we finally move the proposal to the final status the next one is eib editing office hour as I mentioned we organize this meeting every two weeks recording from the meeting 25 has been added and agenda for meeting 26 is up there please take a look and add your pull request if you have any and that pretty much summarizes all the items listed for today anyone has anything to bring up um I see

a question here in the chat um I'm sorry unfortunately this is naughty meeting where we look into the full request for uh draft and review if there is any final EIP we consider only those EIP for discussion here however thank you for sharing this I hope this circle request will be reviewed by EIP editors uh in case of any help please reach out on ethereum Caterers discount anyone else has any anything to bring up today share for this meeting

um just I mentioned it to Sam I think but uh in 5069 the handbook uh forcibly removing and editors is uh seems an unnecessarily violent way of putting it I'm looking to rewording it thanks awesome very well we can give 28 minutes back to all our participants here today thank you everyone for showing us see you around have a great day everyone

see you bye