BIP3: Rename Created to Assigned #1970

pull murchandamus wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from murchandamus:2025-09-assigned-header changing 1 files +12 −4

murchandamus commented at 9:51 PM on September 16, 2025: contributor

Renames the “Created” header to “Assigned” to better reflect the meaning of the date held in this header field.
ajtowns commented at 10:53 PM on September 16, 2025: contributor

Sounds good, ack.
in bip-0003.md:122 in a5d0e70b2b outdated
```
 118 | @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ appear in the following order. Headers marked with "\*" are optional. All other
 119 |  * Deputies: <Deputies’ names and email addresses>
 120 |    Status: <Draft | Complete | Deployed | Closed>
 121 |    Type: <Specification | Informational | Process>
 122 | -  Created: <Date of number assignment (yyyy-mm-dd), or "?">
 123 | +  Assigned: <Date of number assignment (yyyy-mm-dd), or "?">
```
jonatack commented at 3:47 PM on September 17, 2025:

nit, this is described in line 149 below, but it costs only two words here to make the prescribed values clear at first glance without searching for further context

Assigned: <Date of number assignment (yyyy-mm-dd), or "?" before assignment>
jonatack commented at 3:50 PM on September 17, 2025:

Would it also be acceptable (or preferable) to leave no value prior to assignment? e.g. Assigned:

jonatack commented at 3:53 PM on September 17, 2025:

Note that scripts/buildtable.pl will need to be updated when this change is made across the BIPs.

murchandamus commented at 3:05 AM on September 18, 2025:

Thanks, I will be adding that to #1820.

Would it also be acceptable (or preferable) to leave no value prior to assignment? e.g. Assigned:

I think I would prefer it to have a value, but the preference is weakly held.
jonatack commented at 3:49 PM on September 17, 2025: member

LGTM
murchandamus force-pushed on Sep 18, 2025
in bip-0003.md:618 in b5406d53f3 outdated
```
 614 | @@ -613,6 +615,12 @@ feedback, and helpful comments.
 615 |  
 616 |  ## Rationale
 617 |  
 618 | +[^assigned]: **Why was the Created header renamed to Assigned?**  
```
jonatack commented at 4:09 PM on September 18, 2025:

[^assigned]: **Why was the Created header renamed to Assigned?**
murchandamus commented at 7:44 PM on September 18, 2025:

Double space at the end of a line is markdown for linebreak, which puts the response on a separate line from the question.

in bip-0003.md:549 in b5406d53f3 outdated

 545 | @@ -545,6 +546,7 @@ mentioned in the [Changelog](#changelog) section.
 546 |  - The optional "Version" header is introduced.
 547 |  - The "Discussions-To" header is dropped as it has never been used in any BIP.
 548 |  - The "License-Code" header has been sunset, as it was used by only five BIPs (98, 116, 117, 330, 340) and created more ambiguity than clarity.
 549 | +- The "Created" header was renamed to "Assigned" as the header’s value is the date of number assignment.[^assigned]

jonatack commented at 4:10 PM on September 18, 2025:

- The "Created" header is renamed to "Assigned", as the header’s value is the date of number assignment.[^assigned]

Edit: also for the "Discussions-To" line just above, s/dropped as/dropped, as/

Edit: could try to use the same verb tense throughout this section (present tense or past tense, e.g., "is" vs "was")

in bip-0003.md:115 in b5406d53f3 outdated

 111 | @@ -112,14 +112,14 @@ appear in the following order. Headers marked with "\*" are optional. All other
 112 |  ##### Overview
 113 |  
 114 |  ```
 115 | -  BIP: <BIP number, or "?">
 116 | +  BIP: <BIP number, or "?" before assignment>

jonatack commented at 4:13 PM on September 18, 2025:

👍

Worth mentioning no leading placeholder zeros (as the filenames do have them)?

  BIP: <BIP number (without leading zeros), or "?" before assignment>

murchandamus commented at 7:45 PM on September 18, 2025:

Okay, I’ll put it in the description of the header, though, rather than in the template

jonatack commented at 4:14 PM on September 18, 2025: member

ACK, couple nits
murchandamus force-pushed on Sep 18, 2025
BIP3: Rename Created to Assigned d7847195aa
murchandamus force-pushed on Sep 18, 2025
murchandamus commented at 7:52 PM on September 18, 2025: contributor

@jonatack, @ajtowns: I have addressed all comments
jonatack added the label Proposed BIP modification on Sep 18, 2025
jonatack commented at 2:32 PM on September 19, 2025: member

ACK d7847195aa30a3cc63eb34de8b75f60c3157691b
jonatack merged this on Sep 19, 2025
jonatack closed this on Sep 19, 2025
katesalazar commented at 1:41 PM on September 21, 2025: contributor

Sorry for such a late join, but wouldn't "date of number assignment" be "numbered" rather than "assigned"?
Hero-Gamer referenced this in commit 32aaa27590 on Sep 25, 2025
jonatack commented at 11:38 PM on October 8, 2025: member

Sorry for such a late join, but wouldn't "date of number assignment" be "numbered" rather than "assigned"?

Thanks @katesalazar for the suggestion. Discussed your question with Murch offline, and I think the only clear improvement over "assigned" would be a phrase that includes the word “date”, e.g., assignment date, date of number assignment, etc.

For now, we'll leave it as-is, and it can be improved later, if desired (for instance, after #1820).

Contributors

Labels

Proposed BIP modification