Moving this repo to bitcoin-core

achow101 commented at 5:11 pm on April 24, 2025: member

Organizationally, it doesn’t make sense for Bitcoin Core to be under the bitcoin GitHub organization. All of our other repos (gui, qa-assets, dev wiki, etc.) are under bitcoin-core, so having just this one repo in a different organization doesn’t totally make sense. It’s only in bitcoin/ for historical reasons. The bitcoin-core organization was created several years ago for the express purpose of moving this repo there, but we still haven’t done it.

Conceptually, it makes sense to complete the move as it gives further strength to the fact that Bitcoin Core is not Bitcoin. This move also provides us with some organizational benefits, primarily in the form of not having to keep two organization member and team lists in sync.

Additionally, because bitcoin and bips are under the same bitcoin github org, there are some questions about moderation and banning of people from either repo. A ban from one repo is necessarily a ban from both as bans are issued by the organization, not the repo. However, since Bitcoin Core and BIPs are separate projects, this type of behavior does not make any sense, and both projects should be able to make their own moderation decisions without impacting the other. By moving one or both repos out of the bitcoin github org, this conflict can be resolved.

When a repository is transferred, github will automatically create redirects for all of the URLs, including git remotes. This move would not affect anyone’s workflows, nor would it break any existing links to bitcoin/bitcoin. The only requirement is that a bitcoin/bitcoin repository is not created after the move. This necessitates that the current owners of the bitcoin github organization will remain the owners of it in order to prevent any takeovers of the redirects.

A related but tangential topic is whether bips should move to its own organization as well, and the bitcoin github org can remain under current ownership to preserve redirects for both repos.

This was discussed during today’s IRC meeting: https://achow101.com/ircmeetings/2025/bitcoin-core-dev.2025-04-24_16_00.log.html

The general sentiment seems to be in favor of this move, although it seems like there are still some reservations about doing so. I’m opening this issue for additional long form discussion. This will also be a topic in next week’s IRC meeting.

laanwj added the label Brainstorming on Apr 24, 2025

achow101 commented at 5:17 pm on April 24, 2025: member

One concern that was brought up during the IRC meeting is whether github might recycle the bitcoin org if it were to have no activity. This would be problematic as if it were recycled this opens up the possibility of scammers to create a new bitcoin/bitcoin that points to something malicious. However, several contributors have tried to get github to release inactive usernames and organizations with extreme difficulty, and generally unable to actually get them to do that, so I think this risk is relatively low. It seems that github actually is quite reluctant to release usernames or organization names, although it supposedly has happened before. I believe that it can be further mitigated by adding a readme to the organization profile that states the purpose of the organization being inactive so that redirects are preserved.

There was also the concern that github may decide to break redirects in the future, for whatever reason. While we can’t know what github will do in the future, their past behavior with transferred repositories is that the redirects are permanent as long as there is no repo of the same name created in the original org. Several contributors have transferred repositories before (even out of the bitcoin org too) and all of those redirects still remain.

kanzure commented at 5:54 pm on April 24, 2025: contributor

I would like to see a write-up of the different GitHub arrangements so that we can compare the plans by name.

sr-gi commented at 6:14 pm on April 24, 2025: member

I expressed my concerns about moving bitcoin out of the bitcoin org / leaving the bitcoin org empty during the meeting, but I think it is worth elaborating on them.

While I can see the logistical benefits of splitting the orgs and how it may make admin/moderator lives easier, I don’t think that’s enough motivation to overcome the potential risks of redirections being broken, github giving up the org due to inactivity, or a takeover of the bitcoin/bitcoin repo. I do agree that these threads are really unlikely, but the implications are massive when compared to the benefits of splitting the orgs.

If the main motivation is making moderation easier, moving out the bips repository and leaving bitcoin under the bitcoin org seems a less risky option.

achow101 commented at 6:33 pm on April 24, 2025: member

I would like to see a write-up of the different GitHub arrangements so that we can compare the plans by name.

I’ve written it in this gist: https://gist.github.com/achow101/e20dcc0818e2b346e699438b70ee8b8c

I think discussion of bips is a bit off topic for this repo as the actions taken by either repo are largely unrelated.

If the main motivation is making moderation easier, moving out the bips repository and leaving bitcoin under the bitcoin org seems a less risky option.

I don’t think that’s the main motivation - perhaps it’s the main practical concern currently.

The main motivation is really a philosophical one. Bitcoin Core is not Bitcoin, but having it under the bitcoin org and having the repo named bitcoin suggests that it is Bitcoin. By moving to bitcoin-core, and even renaming it, we further establish the separation between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin.

jonatack commented at 7:52 pm on April 25, 2025: member

ACK after reading the above, the IRC meeting discussion, and @achow101’s gist.

The main motivation is really a philosophical one.

Agree.

achow101 commented at 4:32 pm on May 1, 2025: member

One thing to mention is that several contributors are not comfortable with transferring the ownership of the bitcoin github org to anyone else, so regardless of any moves, the current bitcoin org owners will remain unchanged and no new owners added.

achow101 commented at 11:23 pm on May 6, 2025: member

A few people (@darosior, @glozow) mentioned at last week’s IRC meeting that they’d like to have more time to think on this and we’d punt another week. If you have any thoughts on this topic that you’d like to share, that’d be appreciated. I’d rather not punt for another week again.

Moving this repo to bitcoin-core #32340