EIP Improvement Process #125
Transcript
Call summary
Summary
EIPIP #125 worked through the passed call-for-input items (Unicode technical standards, the associate-editor role, and citation formatting), then debated whether citations should carry a 'draft' marker and whether the EIP-7870 hardware-requirements proposal should stay Living or move to Final. Editors agreed to merge Greg's static-control-flow write-up as an Informational EIP, confirmed progress on an automated EIP-numbering bot, and heard a community demo of a multi-repo local build system for the next-generation EIP website.
Decisions
- •Greg's static-control-flow write-up will be merged as an Informational EIP; editors withdrew their objections, and it can be referenced by core EIPs 7979 and 8013.
- •Citation-status marker: no decision reached; Sam will add a proposed approach as a comment and the item stays open for editor input.
- •EIP-7870 Living-vs-Final: no decision; moved to async discussion and the next meeting.
- •Automated EIP-numbering bot: editors confirmed the agreed path forward to add it to the EIP repository.
- •Force-merge permission: resolved; an additional editor (Yam) now holds force-merge permission.
Highlights
- •Citation status marker: Sam argued cited works are assumed complete unless marked draft, so everything except Final/Living should carry a marker; Pooja cautioned that the word 'draft' overloads the three existing status labels. No conclusion; kept open for editor input.
- •EIP-7870 (node hardware/bandwidth requirements): debate over Living vs Final. Sam argued Living should be reserved for editor-internal documents; others noted Living lets the recommendations track state growth between forks. Moved to async discussion.
- •An automated EIP-numbering bot for the repository has a path forward agreed in a prior call, removing manual number assignment.
- •Community demo: RTO presented a multi-repo local build system (Zola-based) so contributors can build and validate the next-gen EIP site locally without fighting CI.
- •Pooja proposed surfacing forward links (future EIPs that build on a given EIP) in the website UI rather than as a new preamble field.
Action Items
- •Sam - Add a proposed approach as a comment on the citation-status PR and keep it open for editor input
- •Editors - Add input on the passed call-for-input items (Unicode standards, associate editor, citation status, informational-EIP status)
- •Editors - Discuss EIP-7870 Living-vs-Final async and bring proposals to the next meeting
- •Sam / RTO - Review the multi-repo local build-system PRs and split them into smaller stacked PRs
- •Editors - Decide where to document the test-case and reference-implementation format (likely template.md) by the next meeting
Key decisions
Greg's static-control-flow document will be merged as an Informational EIP; editor objections were withdrawn, and core EIPs 7979 and 8013 can reference it.
Merged as Informational rather than folded into a core EIP or buried in assets, so dependent core proposals can link to it.No decision was reached on adding a draft/status marker to citations; Sam will post a proposed approach and the item stays open for editor input.
Concern that adding 'draft' to citations conflicts with the existing page and preamble status labels.EIP-7870 (hardware/bandwidth requirements) Living-vs-Final status was not resolved and moves to async discussion for the next meeting.
Living allows ongoing updates but risks an eternally-editable document; Final gives a fork-point snapshot but cannot signal that it is superseded.Editors confirmed the path forward to add an automated EIP-numbering bot to the repository, removing manual number assignment.
Force-merge permission was extended to an additional editor (Yam), resolving the prior request to broaden it beyond two editors.
EIPs discussed
AI Disclaimer: Some content or metadata on EIPsInsight may be AI-inferred or automatically compiled. If you find any discrepancy, please contact us at dev@avarch.org.