* - Updated links - ACD, FEM
- Added EIP editor - Matt Garnett
- recommended to open a discussion thread at FEM (only recommended place)
* Update eip-1.md
add link to FEM & add EIP editor
* Update eip-1.md
* Update eip-1.md
* Update EIPS/eip-1.md
Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>
* Update eip-1.md
Removed a line "No `discussions-to` header is necessary if the EIP is being discussed privately with the author."
Co-authored-by: Alita Moore <alita.moore805@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>
* Fixes some misspelled words, grammar and comprehension
- Replaces hyphen with colons where applicable
- Introduces em-dashes wherever necessary
- Fixes typos
- A better sentence structure for a few long sentences
* Update EIPS/eip-1.md
Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>
Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>
Let the change control system do what the change control system was designed to do. It is entirely redundant to store change history in the EIP itself and it just adds an ever growing clutter to an already too long (IMO) process description. If anyone wants to see the history they easily can. Also, the history section said to see the history button in the top right of this EIP but that only works if you view this EIP from GitHub, not from any other interface.
This has been discussed a few times. The main problem is that editors have a challenge finding EIP authors and getting their response, unless there is a clear GitHub username. This is blocking a lot of outstanding change requests.
I'm updating EIP statuses according to #2996. The mappings are as follows:
```
Draft => Draft
Last Call => Last Call
Accepted => Final
Final => Final
Superseded => Final
Abandoned => Withdrawn
Rejected => Withdrawn
Active => Living
```
The proposed Status to changes to EIP-1 inline with clarifiying the EIP repo as soley a standardization body.
Decisions made during the 17th EIPIP meeting. ethereum-cat-herders/EIPIP#33
I have gone through and updated all existing EIPs to match this rule, including EIP-1.
In some cases, people were using markdown citations, I suspect because the long-form was a bit verbose to inline. Since the relative path is quite short, I moved these to inline but I wouldn't be opposed to putting them back to citation format if that is desired by the authors.
In doing the migration/cleanup, I found some EIP references to EIPs that don't actually exist. In these cases I tried to excise the reference from the EIP as best I could.
It is worth noting that the Readme actually already had this rule, it just wasn't expressed properly in EIP-1 and the "Citation Format" section of the readme I think caused people a bit of confusion (when citing externally, you should use the citation format).
* Try to clarify the meaning of EIP fields
* Remove unhelpful extra comments in the template
* Change EIP-1491 from CRLF to LF
* Remove template comments from EIPs
* Fix heading: Abstarct -> Abstract
* Update EIP-2014
* Change author list of EIP-1
* switch to eipv
* fix
* fix
* 1153 remove trailing whitespace
* remove file name checks
* 615 remo whitespace before comma
* 884 remove extra single-quotes
* 1337 remove whitespace before comma
* 1057 remove extra spaces after comma
* 2470 update created date to Y/M/D format
* 1078 update required eips to be in ascending order
* 2477 update required eips to be in ascending order
* 1271 remove extra whitespace
* 2767 required eipupdated to be in ascending order
* 2525 update created date to Y/M/D format
* 2458 remove trailing whitespace
* 1884 remove trailing whitespace
* 712 authors should be on a single line
* 601 remove extra whitespace
* 1485 remove unneeded parentheses
* 634 remove trailing whitespace
* 2657 update discussions-to to correct spelling
* 2009 remove trailing whitespace
* 998 required eips updated to be in ascending order
* 1186 remove trailing whitespace
* 1470 remove extra whitespace
* 1895 update created date to Y/M/D format
* 2747 remove extra whitespace
* 1613 remove leading whitespace
* 1571 can'have both handle and email in author field
* 1191 remove trailing whitespace
* 1973 remove trailing whitespace
* 196 don't wrap title field
* 1679 required eips must be in ascending order
* 1620 author can't have both handle and email
* 197 don't line wrap title field
* 2378 remove extra newline
* 1355 author can't have both handle and email
* 698 update created date to Y/M/D format
* 2193 required eips must be in ascending order
* 214 remove extra info after author email
* use v0.0.3 of eipv
* 1 remove malformed field
* bump eipv to v0.0.4
* cache eipv build
* 1485 remove extra author info
* 2771 removing extra whitespaces
It appears that the format `EIP-X` is preferred to `EIPX`:
```console
$ grep "EIP-[0-9]+" * | wc -l
373
$ grep "EIP[0-9]+" * | wc -l
118
```
Also note that several of the `EIPX` references are coming from `index.html` and `EIPS/eip-1.md`.
```console
$ grep "EIP[0-9]+" index.html | wc -l
4
$ grep "EIP[0-9]+" EIPS/eip-1.md | wc -l
13
```
I have updated `index.html` and `eip-1` accordingly.
* add mandatory "security considerations" to EIP-1 and template EIP-x
* security considerations: clarify wording and process
* security considerations: update eip-1
* Add updated date to EIP-1
Co-authored-by: Alex Beregszaszi <alex@rtfs.hu>
* EIP-1: make category field in EIP more clear
* Better heading in README
* EIP-2: fix typo in rendering
* EIP-1: clarify that an EIP can move from the Abandoned status to the Draft status
Also clarify that EIPs cannot move from the Rejected and Superseded states.
* EIP-1: rename WIP status to Idea
* EIP-1: change template formatting to fix markdown rendering
With angle brackets markdown renders them as HTML tags sometimes (depending on the rendering engine).
* EIP-1812: change copyright link to the correct CC0 link
* Update eip-1.md
* Update EIPS/eip-1.md
Co-Authored-By: timbeiko <t.beiko23@gmail.com>
* Update EIP-1 based on reviewer feedback
* Remove qualifiers
Based on @carver's comments.
* Rephrase based on review feedback
Rephrase based on review feedback
* Format the author header more nicely
* Use code highlighting on header fields
* Include proper headings for the header descriptions
* Group discussions-to requiements in a single place
* Clarify date formats in a single place
* Changes EIP-1 wording to focus on technicals not community sentiment.
All of the recent changes to the EIP process have been made to ensure that the EIP process is a technical one, and not one of sentiment analysis. There is a lot of discussion going on with regards to how we can improve the process and get valid community sentiment analysis pre-fork, but there doesn't exist a complete solution yet at this time (just proposals).
It appears that the Last Call PR introduced sentiment analysis into the process, which I do not believe was intended. From my recollection of the discussions around the Last Call stuff, the goal wasn't to fundamentally change how governance works, but rather to ensure that EIPs don't get stuck indefinitely in limbo.
This change simply removes the sentiment analysis wording from the process and makes it more clear that the EIP process is about gauging technical feasibility, not making judgement calls as to whether or not a thing is a good idea or not.
* Adds Active state
* Add notion that Github PR can't be discussion-to
* Update eip-1.md
* Update <url> it is interpret as HTML tag
* Update eip-1.md
* Update eip-1.md
* Update eip-1.md
* Add new two-week review process to EIPs
* Add ACCEPTED status, thanks @arachnid
* Use last call, thanks @arachnid
* Add other authors
* Re-add "request to merge"
* Add accepted as draft
* Match statuses to words used in text
* Match whitespace
* Add last call RSS
* add RSS link to EIP1
* Update deferred wording
* Provide
* "EIP authors can request"
* Correct HTML error
* review-period last date only
* Briefer review end date name
* alse
* Fully document statuses and transitions
* One implementation for draft
* Focus on the goal
* Use prior definition of final
* Use Accepted
* Use Accepted
* PR is the preferred mechanism to request status changes
* hide markdown formatting
* EIP-1 minors edits: clarify some sections on EIP collaborators and editors, cross-links, links, grammar, etc.
* Add a link for [Ethereum philosophy](https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper#philosophy) to the section in the white paper that was originally removed and which I re-added recently.
* Revise the format for the author header (names can be optional for anonymity).
* History edits (link to revision history + a minor edit).
* Add cross-links to other sections for better readability and clarity.
* Add clarifications on approval before merging from both editors and authors.
* Add more links for discussion channels
* Link to other clients and eips.ethereum.org.
* Reorder EIP editors roughly based on recent contributions.
* Other minor edits: grammar, etc.
* Add a link to core dev meetings
* discussion*s*
- Create `assets` folder
- Move existing EIPs (1, 107, 858) assets into the `assets` folder
- Update link to assets in EIPs 1, 107 and 858
- Describe the inclusion of assets for EIPs in `README.md`
