README: remove BIP 63 from the README index #1574

pull Roasbeef wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from Roasbeef:remove-bip-63-readme changing 1 files +0 −7
  1. Roasbeef commented at 0:52 am on April 23, 2024: contributor

    In this commit, I propose we remove BIP 63 from the README index. The BIP number was assigned in this PR, but no document was ever committed to the repo (?).

    Alternatively, based on BIP 2, we could just move it to the Rejected (or Obsolete) status, as the PR above was originally made more than 10 years ago:

    BIPs should be changed from Draft or Proposed status, to Rejected status, upon request by any person, if they have not made progress in three years.

    AFAICT, the concept was ultimately described in BIP 47 (Reusable Payment Codes for Hierarchical Deterministic Wallets): https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0047.mediawiki

  2. README: remove BIP 63 from the README index
    In this commit, I propose we remove BIP 63 from the README index. The
    BIP number was assigned in [this
    PR](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/14), but no document was ever
    committed to the repo (?).
    
    Alternatively, based on BIP 2, we could just move it to the Rejected
    status, as the PR above was originally made more than 10 years ago:
    
    > BIPs should be changed from Draft or Proposed status, to Rejected
    > status, upon request by any person, if they have not made progress in
    > three years.
    5bdf09f1a3
  3. luke-jr commented at 2:41 pm on April 23, 2024: member
    It’s probably better to keep the table complete even if historically it shouldn’t have been assigned a number
  4. katesalazar commented at 5:11 pm on April 23, 2024: contributor

    bitcoin/bips is implicitly append-only by process NAK

    On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:53 AM Olaoluwa Osuntokun < @.***> wrote:

    In this commit, I propose we remove BIP 63 from the README index. The BIP number was assigned in this PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/14, but no document was ever committed to the repo (?).

    Alternatively, based on BIP 2, we could just move it to the Rejected (or Obsolete) status, as the PR above was originally made more than 10 years ago:

    BIPs should be changed from Draft or Proposed status, to Rejected status, upon request by any person, if they have not made progress in three years.

    AFAICT, the concept was ultimately described in BIP 47 (Reusable Payment Codes for Hierarchical Deterministic Wallets): https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0047.mediawiki

    You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

    #1574 Commit Summary

    File Changes

    (1 file https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1574/files)

    Patch Links:

    — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1574, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMRS4W4YUFWNAC726O4ACZDY6WWIVAVCNFSM6AAAAABGTY45KSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZSGI2TONZQGU2DGNA . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

  5. Roasbeef commented at 5:44 pm on April 24, 2024: contributor

    It’s probably better to keep the table complete even if historically it shouldn’t have been assigned a number

    Sure, that’s reasonable.

  6. Roasbeef closed this on Apr 24, 2024


github-metadata-mirror

This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bips. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2024-10-31 23:10 UTC

This site is hosted by @0xB10C
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me