EIPIP Meeting 114

Transcript

oh [Music] oh [Music] [Music]

oh [Music] oh [Music] oh

[Music] [Music] welcome to EIP IP meeting

114 this is issue number 1331 on ethereum PM issues for people who aren't aware we have moved EIP IP meeting agenda to etherium PM repository it's not with eat cat herders anymore so kindly add your issues or topics for discussion on agenda on ethereum PM GitHub repository I shared the link in chat and for today's meeting we have a few open issues and PLL request for editors review we'll take a look into some of the edits those are proposed to final

proposals and uh call for input along with some discussions from earlier meetings including EIP reviewers and uh the stagnant bot so starting with the first item on the agenda um we have an issue created modernized eips platform migration from Jackal I I think it is already been uh getting attention I see some of the comments by Sam Wilson Sam if you would like to maybe quickly bring us up to the speed where we are and yeah what are the progress with respect to either the

working group or if this is the way we would like to proceed with sure so um this is a a third part who's um reimplemented the EIP website um on top of I think it was um nujs um which is like a static site generator platform um it's a fairly nice site uh All Things Considered but it is a fairly radical change from uh the E's website today um and we've also already been working on an upgrade

from the eips platform uh so yeah that's what this is um the objections that I have to it is that it's typescript and uh a lot of typescript so it adds a lot of complexity um and none of the EIP editors are extremely familiar with typescript so it'd be a fairly large maintenance burden for us to to take on uh um yeah and then like check it out it's it is nice um I wouldn't mind getting other editor opinions on um whether we want to go with this or something else um a little bit later I can show you what um my modernization of the Eeps

platform looks like um and uh we can we can talk about that too but that's about it for this one thank you Sam for providing the overview um just for the participants there is a conflict between two calls right now it's EIP I and eof currently we are in the EIP IP meeting so any participants who are here for euf meeting May kindly check the protocol calendar and they will get the zoom link for that meeting and um coming back to this particular issue it would be nice to either collect feedback on the issue itself or if people have some thought that they would

like to mention it right here please feel free to share okay in that case we can perhaps collect the feedback from different editors on this particular idea or if this is the path forward for us uh yeah please go ahead and drop your input to issue number [Music] 9332 the next one is why not leverage

GitHub discussion as well I know there has been a lot of uh discussion around what is the best place where we would like to discuss especially with respect to eips and fellowship of ethereum magician has been a winner we would want to move on all the discussion with respect to proposal over there but I wonder if people still want to consider this or if so what would be the kind of discussion we would want to have here yeah any thoughts on this particular issue number is 9204 I feel like we have ethereum magicians and we own the data for Theory

magicians with GitHub we don't really own the data and I think the less riing we are on GitHub probably is for the better agreed in that case do we want to just leave a m message for the um author or whoever has started this issue and perhaps close this one not to generate a lot of momentum if that's not the direction we are considering yeah leave a comment and close it sounds good the next one is a CI switch to upload artifact it seems like a pull request uh there was some issue

that has been shared here um I'm not sure if anyone got a chance to take a look at it it's related with updating Jackal yml uh yeah I'm taking a look at it right now cool if anyone has any comment on that please feel free to add it the idea of listing all of them over here is like to to get them some attention here and yeah um maybe editors can leave feedback yeah this one's this one's good it's just titled is incorrect um all right

um do we want to resolve it here I mean like do you have any questions for any other editors otherwise we can perhaps move ahead and look into other issues yep we can move ahead I already matched it we're good to go thank you so the next one is U uh number 9468 it seems like an a Spam so perhaps take a look and maybe close or let us know yep I'll take a look at it and the last one in this list is number is 9115 it talks about vulnerable dependencies in the repository but it seems like I'm not sure maybe a Spam here kindly take a look in that as

well with that we can move to uh edits to final proposals the first one one already seems to be closed so that's good the next one is uh docs clarify Json RPC reference and grammar so here we are getting some of the P requests to update the proposal which are already uh in the final status um I wonder if anyone has any objection in merging this proposal it seems like it has touched two eips this is 9305 correct yeah this is fine it's just spelling

mistake changes I'm getting ring this cool the next one is an update to EIP 1186 and again fixing typo the number is 8986 yep that looks fine too cool uh moving ahead couple of more one is for um fixing error for uh uh the the pr number is 9314 4 and uh it is

again touching two eips as well as one ci. yml file so generally in these case all the authors are pinged but yeah I can understand if these are final and editors wants to make a decision right there um yeah I'll take care of this one um offline just because I have to edit it sounds good the last one on the list is an update to EIP 1 it seems like um not just EIP 1 it seems like there are again multiple files uh which are

being corrected here but especially when we talk about EIP 1 um okay no it's not the same one okay cool it again has a bunch of uh typo fixes um if you want to go ahead and March that could be taken care offline as well just wanted to list it here so editus may take a look whenever I get chance take a look thank you yeah okay I think someone has already closed the next one that was my worry like it seems like it's not just typo fixing it's more than typo fixing so glad it is closed now moving ahead uh the topic is a stagnant bot but I know there is a lot on the stagnant bot so we

will get on this topic after we finish the call for input so we have two open call for input as of now uh the issue numbers are 381 and 376 it seems like we have passed the deadline for 376 Sam if you would like to maybe talk about both of them and perhaps we can make a decision or close the one which we have already passed the deadline yeah can do so um somebody wants to link to a standard from blockchain Commons this is for 376 um they're another group that provides standardization they haven't been around very long

um bumble fudge says that they have a pretty good standards process but uh personally for the time being I don't think we should allow links to it um if anybody else has a different opinion let me know now or I'll close this it seems like we already have two editors in not not in favor and one is going neutral uh any other editor wants to add please feel free to add it otherwise this has already passed it time neutral cool so it can be closed I believe the next one is um issue 381 and the deadline is March

21 we have received only one response from Sam and uh that is not in the favor any other editor wants to add comment or some perap the um yeah yeah the idea the idea behind this one is that um there's a vulnerability in the reference implementation um it's a fairly specific vulnerability if I remember correctly um and they want to change the reference implementation to deal with it um but it is a final proposal and and this is not a clarification or um AATA I don't think so personally I don't think we should merge it but that's just me yeah I agree with Sam that we should

handle security vulnerabilities in a different manner so as such I'll go with Sam cool I will leave a note to that effect any thoughts Victor and Matt cool in chat I receive a response as no preference can be okay um we still have a few more days left to close this particular issue so if if there is any preference or response kindly add it to

the issue so we can take care of that uh otherwise uh the due date is March 21 for this particular issue with that we can perhaps move on to the next item listed on agenda which is other discussions and updates from the past meetings so um the first item here is EIP reviewers we have conducted an EIP reviewer survey and um I was trying to collate them in form of a report I'm going to share the link to the report here perhaps I can also share my screen for a minute um so what I have done here

basically is uh we have collected a response from different uh reviewers uh what are their areas of expertise how they would want to support our ecosystem with adding their reviews their cont contributions this reports talks about what reviewers generally do and how we can measure their performance like how we can make sure that these reviewers may be considered for becoming EIP editor one day the idea of this U progress is that we should have more editors getting uh to support the proposals which we are getting in different repositories for that I'm happy to share that we do have a tool kind of right now

that we are in a position to measure so the left side of leader board is for editors and it is since 2015 how many contribution has been made and this right side is about the reviewers so we have we already have kind of six reviewers who are actively getting involved um since January 2025 and we are trying to track off their contributions um this table is not up to date I think it was created a couple of weeks ago so this may not be providing the exact data but uh it seems uh to have like good number of reviews are being done by new reviewers who are

trying to contribute to EIP editing and reviewing processes so thank you and congratulations to all of them um we are hoping to uh measure these uh reviewing activities by total number of reviews conducted in in the in a month by each individual reviewers and what are the uh comments which are being added how productive they are and things like that as a Next Step my uh recommendation here is just to get more people involved in that and try to focus on more technical reviews of proposals which are there because we do have editors who are doing editorial reviews so having editorial reviews are good but if we can

get more technical reviews on that side it will be easier for us to decide which EIP should be moved forward with either the network upgrade or even in the ERC section here we have also tried to document uh the area of expertise for each of these reviewers like if they are into ERC side if they are into EIP side and what are their area of expertise I wanted to share this list so people who are actually looking for some kind of help and support may be able to reach out to these reviewers and may be able to tag uh in their PR so they can get their reviews yeah um we should make this report public I wonder if anyone has any

question comment on this particular topic and I already see a couple of reviewers joining in this call here I see Mercy I see scanda thank you everyone for helping us with this cool with that we can perhaps move on to the next section uh that is eips Insight uh I I see viven already on the call um we can discuss the status of U the stagnant bar that we discussed in the last meeting as well as some new

tool I I see he has requested to be shared today so yeah B please take it over thank you Puja uh I'll share my screen and get so uh the first update from our side is in the proposal Builder tool it is now Dynamic and also like the URL gets changed based on the um options that they have selected and you can share it and uh able to edit it uh with others so by using this you can get EIP crcs RPS present data and modified uh on the proposal Builder tool

so this is one of the update on the proposal Builder side and the second one is all eips page uh so in this page we have uh converted it so that every EIP data is present here in this format and uh where you can see the network upgrades information and also in the table format so that everything is at one place uh and is accessible easily so this is another update and regarding the EIP stagnant bot especially so uh we have worked on the stagnant bot based on the presentation that we have uh made previously uh adding a type check for the um required fields and uh excluding

the yeah uh by adding the type check for the request field and we have also shared the source code for this so like we have made it but uh we have some trouble on the testing side of this one uh like uh I haven't worked on the testing side of the actions for GitHub previously so like it is getting Troublesome for me so in case if there is anyone who has worked on this before or is uh want to contribute on this one uh I would request to please reach out to us on this part uh can yeah sorry yeah unfortunately it was

just Panda pep who had worked on this um so any expertise we had is is gone yeah so in case if anyone is interested or want to contribute on this one uh please reach out to us you can find these links the source code that we have changer and also the presentation that we have made I have also added these two in the agenda and regarding the monthly Insight um there are four eips and N ercs in the draft stage and two eips and one ERC that has moved to review stage one EIP to last call and twoips and two is to Staten

St and uh there is one more thing uh so uh we have made a uh PR previously for the adding our U proposal Builder tool to the eips do ethereum.org while working with the stagnant Bo we had some issues so we had to close the previous PR and un the commit and so we had to

create a new PR uh in the previous one I remember Sam you have approved it uh I apologize for the inconvenience but uh could you have a look at this one as well and I request from uh other editors as well like it needs two editors to accept the changes so I request for please going through that if there are any questions I'll be happy to answer thank you VIN I already see a comment by scanda here he is open to help out to the stagnant bot maybe you two can get in touch um just quickly want to check are you on eat cat herders

Discord uh if not you can join there and it would be a good place to continue with the conversation and I will also try to get in touch with panda peep in case we um we get him he can also help with that so yeah uh we just need help on the testing side like the code is done so that is what I want yeah cool thank you so much on that and I think this proposal Builder tool the EIP Builder tool that is there that may help all the existing authors as well as new Authors if existing authors want to make any changes to existing proposal maybe move it different status they can

perhaps uh have their PR ready from right right from here so yeah I think adding this tool to e. ethereum.org may help a lot of others to work on updating their proposal so thank you for that um with that we have covered most of the uh active uh topics for this agenda but I remember Sam mentioned earlier in this meeting that he would like to maybe talk about the working group page that he has been working on and it is a different idea than that was proposed by another user but it would be a good idea to take a look at it so Sam if you would like to maybe quickly share your yeah sure yeah so um kind of the goal of this

reimplementation is to to it not be noticeable at all so um if you remember about a year ago I had started working on this I had present a little bit um it's basically done now there's a few small outstanding things um look verifying that the uh EIP review bot um still works properly but aside from that uh it's done so um this page is rendered by Zola which is a static site generator written in Rust um and there's a pre-processor that uh takes the EI formatted markdown and converts it into

Zola formatted markdown um and it generates a site that looks essentially exactly the same as um the old EIP website um except it takes about two minutes to build instead of 10 um it's also incredibly lightweight so that that's the main advantage over the next JS um proposal uh is that this is super simple um yeah I can walk a little bit through uh how it works if we care um how much time do we have right now yeah okay I can spend a little bit of time about this so

um the org that I'm developing this in Eeps WG is kind of a hold over from when we were talking about doing a whole bunch of working groups um you could ignore pretty much all of it except for um a few repositories here so we have the pre-processor which is a rush program um that uh incorporates uh ew it uh incorporates the link Checker it incorporates um a spell checker it does basically everything that our build did before but it does it in a single rust binary um this also has the huge advantage of being able to run locally uh so you'll get all the feedback that you would get from GitHub actions but um

locally if you want um so uh after the pre-processor it gets built by Zola which is a third party thing um we have our uh eips theme uh built here which is um just a normal Zola theme based on the Jackal Minima theme uh yeah nothing special here it's just a theme um and then I guess the other important piece here is the bootstrap repository so this is a bash script that takes the eips repository as it is today and converts it into the format expected by um the pre-processor so this is a one-time script that we run

um yeah this is a run onetime script that we run that does the transformation between the the proposals uh or the the formats um if we actually take a look at a post bootstrapping uh repository this is what it looks like you'll note that it has um just a Content directory um inside the content directory you'll have uh every proposal uh here gets its own directory or it's a markdown file uh and then if we go into one of the proposals uh you'll notice that the assets are alongside the proposal itself so it makes it a little bit easier to find the files that are related to a proposal um and if you go into the markdown file it's going to look exactly

the same uh as a um EIP proposal today so um thep author should notice very little change uh the the render documentation should have very little change um that's kind of been my goal here is just to make this as transparent as possible so yeah um does anybody have any questions about this this is great Sam um just uh my question is what is the next step here like are we planning to replace the existing e. ethereum.org or are we planning to host it somewhere else uh so this works exactly the same

way jaal does so we'll this will just be a push to the git repository and it'll switch over to building with this instead of with jaal so there will be no change to where it's hosted okay so it will be just a new look for the present e s. ethereum.org exactly I mean it shouldn't even be a new look it should look exactly the same okay cool yeah I understand we are still not considering rips for this particular section do we want to add that as well or we want to like proceed with Asis uh yeah so this is built so that we can add RPS if we want um the bootstrap won't work for them because they have a slightly different repository structure so we'll have to do it by hand but um

I'd be happy to include them in this as well I think it would be a good idea to include it because as per my understanding there are about 14 rip already existing so it would be a good idea to have visibility of these proposals as well yeah sure we can add those in cool um any other question comment for Sam all right I guess I'll go ahead and um finish this up and then I'll make the poll requests and um that hopefully will be sometime in April thank you I hope that before the

next meeting it is there or maybe we can if it is not much then maybe we can discuss the be in the next meeting and we can see it there um talking about the next meeting I have noticed that we are in conflict with ef meeting as of now EIP meeting happens every third Wednesday at 1500 UTC which uh sometimes Falls in conflict with the UF meeting that happens on Alternate Wednesday at 1500 UTC so generally speaking are we comfortable with moving this meeting an hour earlier at around, 1400 UTC so we don't have the conflict anymore actually the question is will anyone be opposed to it I know some

people have already shared that we are fine cool okay thank you Sam thank you gajender and I also noticed comment from Victor it's okay for me so we would have the next meeting on um April 16th at 1400 UTC that pretty much cover our agenda for today does anyone have any any final comments thoughts or any item for next discussion to be added here well in that case we can wrap up a little bit early thank you everyone for

joining us here today and I hope to see these interesting changes coming up with our website and the stagnant bot and things like that it can be discussed on E caters EIP editor EIP editor Discord channel so please feel free to stop by there and add your inputs thank you everyone have a great day [Music] oh

[Music] [Music] o [Music] oh

[Music] [Music] n [Music] oh

[Music] a [Music] oh

[Music]