EIPIP Meeting 6

Transcript

okay looks like we can start this is meeting number six of the EIP IP meetings and unless anyone else wants to do it I can do it today going once going twice okay so the first one is one we've been talking a lot about on the telegram chat which is migrating the IP content to a different aetherium org address Sam made a proposal document so I think that's on notion right Sam correct and I shared it with this telegram group and

the IP Gator channel happy to like turn this into an issue on the respective github repositories if that's easier I think that'll be one of the things I'm looking for feedback on today mm-hmm okay sounds good and that actually is the first agenda item so if you want to take it up we don't I think our agenda is pretty light today yeah so we can spend a good amount of time on this if you want to just walk the walk us through it and a lot of it we've already heard before but some of it we haven't on the call is some of the proposed solution and the skepticism criticism sections

specifically so I'll let you take it away and then if people have questions along the way and discussion we'll go through that sure sounds good so good morning everybody if you guys weren't on the call two weeks ago my name is Sam I work as a web developer at the etherium foundation primarily on a theorem org so you can imagine how this idea popped into my head but what this proposal essentially is it's really an effort to like make the EIP content on the github

the IPS sub-domain just more discoverable and more accessible so like what are ways that we can increase exposure and awareness from people inside and outside of the theorem ecosystem and just like educate them get them engaged with the EIP process so this proposal isn't to change anything about the process itself it's really just a change to the public website that would display these existing IPs so I attached this proposal or it's in the agenda we can walk through it in its entirety if people would like or we

could kind of leave it to asynchronous feedback I encourage anyone who has input to go ahead and comment in this notion document it should be publicly accessible to comment but essentially at a high level what I tried to lay out was here's like the problem statement which hopefully like everyone agrees upon as like hey it would be a beneficial thing to get more exposure and increased discoverability of this great content and these standards that the community has developed from the people I've spoken to like within the EIP editing

process and who have managed the repo in the past it does seem like there just hasn't been much capacity to focus on this or like making general improvements to the site so the opportunity I saw was how can we how can we make that better and I outlined some of the things we've tried up to this point such as like adding links from aetherium org doing some on-site optimization of the existing GIP site and starting to build out at additional content on a theorem org that talks about yeah I

and links to additional content there so what this proposal essentially puts out there is like hey one option could be if the main goal is to improve like the search rankings of this EIP content to actually migrate all that content from the existing sub domain to a subdirectory on a theorem org and I lay out some of the reasons like why I and some others think that would be beneficial some of the risk we think involved and some of like the skepticism we've received from a lot of folks in

the community so at this point yeah I guess I'd just like open it up to questions if there are any otherwise yeah if we have time and people are interested we can definitely dig in to specific aspects of the proposal I have one thing or one question for the can you guys hear me yes okay yep um in the problem section I don't know if it's worth putting this explicitly or not the the site itself is also very difficult to discovery IPS within so I I see that you said that there is low bandwidth

from the IPS to make improvements but it doesn't it might be helpful to say there is a problem with the site that needs improving and and then the sub problem of that is that there aren't people working on it mm-hmm because I don't know how many people really like it's at the forefront of their mind that there isn't search functionality on the site it's very hard to find a single EIP unless you have back information about where it would be beforehand and then even then you have to scroll through the site all the way to the bottom if it's if it's in draft or active and you have to know that in advance there's not a way to navigate the IP is easily from within the site itself

yeah just make a note of that yeah and you know I think like with this problem statement and proposed solutions like there's definitely alternative ways to try to address this which as of now yeah I haven't really outlined in the proposal and I'd be happy to because to me it's like two main pieces James you just touched on one is like okay maybe the existing like site interface and UI is suboptimal and there's just general like UX improvements we could make to like make the EIP content easier to

navigate easier to comprehend and share or somehow engage with and then the second main piece is just like the exposure of the content itself primarily from an SEO standpoint like the keyword research I've done around eeew ease and like etherium token standards there's not a ton and this is just using like say like google adwords keyword research tools to get an estimate of like overall impression volume as you can imagine there's really not a ton other than like the most popular VIPs such as like ERC 20 and the

ERC 721 token standards but my hunch is that there is a decent amount of just like long tail search for specific a IPS that in aggregate like do make a pretty significant amount of interest right now the EIP subdomain just doesn't seem to rank very well google does tend to treat subdomains as like independent entities which as we've discussed like can be good for certain things and bad for others in my mind it's like bad for SEO rankings where we have this incredibly old and authoritative

powerful domain at theorum org that we could leverage to help like give this content a boost in a sense of like having those pages on the site being able to link to those internally and index those as part of the main domain I think could potentially like really boost this content in search results so those are the two main things I think that we could potentially separate as like UX UI improvements to the site itself and then just like improving exposure and awareness of the content primarily through like SEO benefits great I completely agree with that Oh

James did you have any other parts of your question or comment another I don't this may or may not need to be included but just so everybody on the call can hear hear this part that the the other problem is that the actual improvement of the EIP process is blocked by improvements to the site and because there are changes we can't make unless someone makes changes on the interface that represents it and so then some of those things have just hold there like I've made a proposal last year to do an inactive status and then the feedback was well there's no one to make the the that you are the bot and the other

things and the sand a site render it so then oh well so then that way it's just frustrating to hear from both sides that well we can't change it but then also the proposals can't go through at the same time anyway yeah I agree with that heavily I think that I'm starting to get really strong feelings that moving the site and with moving the site improving the bot and the website or top priorities because like you just mentioned James without doing that we can't make interative changes to EIP one or the structure of the documents because they can't be updated on the

side and there's not search functionality and a few other things so it's kind of like yeah it's it's exactly what you said and I'm looking I looked through the solution and the skepticism criticism and I mean if you look at it really all we're doing is moving the EIP before aetherium dot org and moving it after aetherium org with the benefit of a lot of SEO and also well it's mainly the SEO I'm focused on because I think we do need more visibility for looking up be IPS on something like etherium org and it's not a case of like trying to separate the two entities because we

already have it E is a theorem org and I think the only people who have these illusions of if it's a blank etherium org being completely separate or people who are really in the ecosystem and what what this is for is for people in and outside of the ecosystem so doing a theory org /e IPS is not going to make a huge difference I don't think as far as like making it illegitimate so I don't like that argument very much even if other sites like seem to tend away from that for standards like very big professional standards sites this is a blockchain standard site and it's like bitcoins

bits or you know pythons it's it's it's like made after Bitcoin standards and python standards in which the Python URL is Python org slash peps I think so all that to say I think we should do it and the only other thing would be yeah they're just going through each criticism I guess I can just do that real quick for my opinion on it and then Sam just stopped me if you have a different one I think you've already written down yours though yeah one quick point I'd make Hudson just to James your your comment on like actual changes to the EIP process being blocked by the

Korean tea I piece a is like once again this specific proposal at least like really isn't making any changes to like the process itself or really even to like the structure of the application itself it would just be like to start mirroring one page to a theorem org so I think what I'm trying to say is like maybe those two things could be solved independently like if there is something about the current structure that's blocking changes to the EIP process like we might be able to address that and try to solve that without this entire proposal or maybe it will make sense to

change as part of this proposal it would help me to understand like what the specific issues are about the current site that are blocking you but just to say that those those changes may be able to be made in isolation I consider them more together and the only reason for that is usually things aren't usually you can do things in isolation it's good to separate but the bot actually talks to or I should say the webserver looks at the e ip's repo and does updates based on that so the bot is in a way communicating with the web server even though it's not bought to server

its server to bot when we do the new one we're gonna have to make sure that it's set up in the same way as the old bot and while we're doing that we might as well update the bot because it's going to be a waste of time too it would be a waste of time overall to to change the bot to just literally all it do is go to aetherium org /e ip's when then we're gonna want to do more to the bot afterwards does that make sense I assume it's better to yeah the bot Mike the bot grades not all of them but like a set of one or two or three priorities one of them being documentation and then get a few people helping on it and then move

it over after a couple of those priorities are set so that we have something we can work with very fresh on the other side when we move it so this is this also helps because this can kind of be an effort that combines to do separate things into one and that's a little stronger when we say this is relaunching the new IPs and this is what we're changing and etc yeah okay yeah I like at this point I don't have a deep understanding of the bot and the inner workings of the application so whenever the time comes probably just we're touching base with you and James to like get some specifics on that yeah let's have a separate call

for sure and take notes we might even stream it just so that people have an understanding of what we changed before and after it for transparency reasons and then Williams said couldn't we just modify the existing subdomain I'm not sure why we need a new domain specifically if we just put in the work on the existing AIP subdomain what wouldn't work so I think you might have missed it while you were logged off William but it's the SEO it's not returning as many hits and I'm not an SEO guys Sam is so you can explain a better Sam if you want to just in a few sentences yeah it's it's a good point and worth reiterating and like what I tried to outline at the beginning is

like what this proposal really tries to dress is like two separate things is like one is like potential UI and UX improvements on the site number two is exposure of the content primarily through SEO so like for a number two to happen to get the SEO benefits from my understanding and you know I've been out of like the hardcore SEO game for a couple years now but it was my career for a few different years and I don't think it's changed too much but I think to get to the SEO benefits like we would need to migrate this content to the read oh man William to your point to

get the like UI and UX and just like general site improvements that does not require migrating this content at all like we could try to find a way to get resources allocated either my time spent improving it or you know funding get coin and bounties to get fixes to the site like it's not at all requirement to do this migration to get those site improvements I think one of the reasons I mentioned in my proposal as like a reason or like an additional benefit of migrating is that on a theorem org we already have a lot of like functionality in place that we could leverage and essentially reuse such as Site Search so

that we wouldn't have to re-implement it in a separate codebase we would just move the content onto a theorem org and then we would just get Site Search and like table of content features out of the box if you will it would definitely come with that upfront cost of like actually executing on this migration now echoing Hudson's thoughts I'd see value putting keeping I well technically you could separate the things into develop on the IP sub domain and having an /c IP that it's much keeping them together makes a lot more sense to me and mostly

from a from like a resources and also like the people involved the the people who are going to be making the changes should be able to do the changes where they want at the end of the day guys we're grateful that you guys are yeah that's very intertwined both the bots and the website migration it's not so intertwined that it couldn't be done separately but like I said earlier it it's a waste of time if it's if it's done separately yeah a william said in other words subdomains have a harder time in SEO yeah if it's blank aetherium org that's worse than aetherium org slash blank yeah an easy way of thinking about that is like

you know the blogspot days are probably over but if you do remember when like anyone could essentially spin up a subdomain on blogspot comm like Google recognizes that distinct subdomains can be under control of distinct groups so they tend to treat them as separate websites and the other piece is that just like the etherium org core domain itself just has massively more inbound links to it compared to the EIP subdomain so we don't have to spend the whole meeting on this but I do want to

give everyone else an opportunity to speak who else has opinions on this or comments just a small when I first started in this like six months ago I was trying to learn my way around the e ip's in the SEO it was really hard so any anything that went to prove that just in my view okay so what I want is an action item I want to work directly with Sam and James but mostly with Sam James only for the necessary explanations to Sam about how the bot how the bot updates stuff and

the blockers we have but before the next meeting I want to get a new notion document going which is a plan a proposed plan for what changes need to be made and a timeline of when to make them that's real rough that we can you know change nothing official but and then also like get some ideas early on about funding and just getting this done cuz if we get this done in the next couple months while we're making decisions and on the backend of how to change the IP one and other stuff in there then we can quickly just do all those changes we can quickly do all those changes later after the

merge and the migrations done or even you know at the end at the same time so that we have this huge package to present the community of here's the updated here's what the updated e ip's that we are the updated e IP one plus the updated domain plus the updated bot plus the updated site by William already left so yeah I think something like that would be really valuable and maybe not all those things at once maybe it needs to be more iterative that I'm talking about so will need help brainstorming but put me as lead on that and then I'll get help around me whoever wants to attend those meetings and brainstorm with me and get it a maybe a seperate telegram chat and yeah so that's all I have about this

topic any last words Sam that sounded threatening anyone else have a comment I guess one question I have is just like in terms of gathering additional community input like would you recommend I open this up as an issue on the repo is there any other groups you'd recommend like sharing this proposal with once we make a so you have the proposal to do it once we make the proposal for how we're doing it we can put both proposals in an issue and also elaborate on that issue on Twitter on the etherium org account and across some communities too like the all core Deb's

getter and just say we're wanting to do this or some of us are wanting to do this and we've been talking a few meetings about this here the notes here are the two proposals we want feedback or opposition if there is any so yeah anyone else sure I mean do that call what was that again yeah you cut out for sure add that the conversation with me you and Sam about the blockers for the process okay perfect so next up we have adding motivation to the meta a IP of an upgrade I don't know who this that was this is in continuation to our last

meeting and that at the end of the meeting we were discussing that it was my proposed proposal initially that we should be adding motivation section in the meta even upgrade initially the thought process was the process that we follow every time for an upgrade is like kind of changing from past two of the upgrades at least we have been seen then the process keeps on changing and I was looking for a place to store this process that we used for a particular upgrade the idea was like if we keep it up dating on the EIP one then next time the process change and we edit EAP one the process for the last upgrade will

get lost so I was thinking if we can add it into the matter if of that particular upgrade people can always find and this thing will be restored forever do you mean the process of the I the process for doing upgrades or the specific process I was taken at that time like there's a standard that we're gonna that we're trying to follow and then there's the what actually happened at that time I meant like for example in Istanbul Istanbul we did the schedule based upgrade so with the process that we follow it can be you know case study for people coming up in future and trying to understand how we did that thing so my idea was to save the information about

that this time we are doing like we are including EFI into into the process and doing an EIP centric so I was hoping to have this mentioned at least in the meta a for bullying so that people should know that this was this is the particular process that we followed for bullying or maybe if we are if you are not changing it and any further upgrade it's fine it can be moved to EAP one but if we are moving changing some other upgrade process for next upgrade it should be mentioned in the next meta e and the reason for having that is for people to be to learn from the process

or what what he would does that ad-free for you too I was thinking about at this point of time we are doing a lot of experiment so there may be a point when we would like to analyze all these data and see which one was the most successful upgrade for us or the process for the upgrade that we should be following so if we have this kind of data available to get analyzed at one point of time that would be helpful but if we keep on losing it it'll be difficult to collect back um I think it's great a great idea to collect that data that that historical perspective so that we can improve upon it I'm skeptical that should be in the IP one in any capacity because what e IP one is

is the purpose of the IP one in my opinion and how its kind of been described in the readme is if you are someone who wants to make a change to a theory 'm and you want a succinct guide on how to do that what the different types are what you have to do to accomplish that and who reviews them you go to e IP one if we start putting stuff about hard Forks in there specifically I think that would be make it bulkier it would also detract from the purpose of the IP one which is just for people who are writing e IP s because if you're writing in the IP you don't care how quarry ip's are processed I think it's a good idea to have it in the meta EIP put

potentially but that also introduces some opinion and non technical material so those are my two comments so far basically this motivation section is available in almost every IP only it is missing in the meta EAP so I understand if people have like the reservation with the word motivation because it is actually not the motivation but as the process that we are trying to document in that which is that actually the non-technical part of it but for the sake of history we can have it and I don't see any downside of that having it in there if we would like to change the thumb because motivation is the term which is there in almost every IP I'm ok

with that I see one downside from including and as far as having the information available for people who are trying to study the EIP process or improve it it would be a little bit more digging but there's plenty of blog posts and things that are available about around the time of the fork that would have even more meta information about the decision process so if someone in my mind if someone is trying to figure that out there is that it would take a little bit more digging but the information is available for them to find it even if it isn't on the meta even if it isn't in the motivational section and the IP is the motivation is basically the list of

eeap's that are included in their heart Fork right it's like we're saying you know why do you have this upgrade well to implement these things that are listed here and and and you can't really have a why that's like more elaborate than that because then people will start disagreeing on it it just becomes like a place for like political you know argumentation so I I don't know I I agree it's odd that they're like a bit different but I think the the cost of making em similar is high and I'm not sure what the value is especially because most of these things are just like technical upgrades right we look at the Berlin it's like the motivation is to add wood BLS 12 381 pre-compiled I

mean I don't know I'm it feels odd to like added motivation for that I get the idea of you know that using the term motivation over there that's why I mentioned that if we would want to use it with the term of process or something maybe I mean like mmm my my basic concern here was like we would want to save the information about the process because the last time what we did for Istanbul I mean I saw a lot of effort in James it's a sheet and the process that we followed it was scheduled based at what time I mean how many weeks but required for this and that it was everything was there but we can't see I mean of course if we keep on checking on that we will be able to find it

somewhere or the other I thought it would be a good idea to keep it somewhere in the in the meta EEP maybe with a different heading if motivation is contradicting the thought of it your head James I would say even with a dip at different heading there's a coordination cost to having that information there and that and that is that it would be great if everything that's on the EIP repo agrees and shows the current understanding of what we're doing for the process and if if we have certain pieces showing historical information about what did happen it it is a place for people to disagree about what is or shouldn't happen and pointing

say like oh well for this last one we did this and then all but really anyone who is talked talking about the process should be pointing at the current process and so having only that that information be the one that's easy to find I think will help with that kind of fragmentation of narrative I think that I think we need this data somewhere which is exactly what Paige is talking about I think it needs to be somewhere cuz I don't I don't want people to have to go digging for it especially as times change and as we improve and we have to re explain to people over and over again but I almost feel like post-mortems that the cat herders right might be a better location and might be something that

people can turn to and say oh this is this is an opinion piece by the cat herders rather than this is something because I mean we we try to keep non-technical an opinion out of the EIP s except for e IP 1 so e IP s should be technical documents with technical note of that motivation implementation security considerations etc and meta AIPS were created by Alex Perez Aussie to document what went into a hard fork at what block and which e ip's went in and should not to make it too complicated so that I think that's the main concern is that it would or the main concerns I should say is that it

would complicate it and impose like James said something that could be disagreed on by opinion but we do need to put it somewhere so I'm I'm thinking maybe somewhere else but would you go ahead III just had an idea for a place a having an informational EIP that is a post-mortem on hard Forks yeah sounds good that can be a place I mean like it should be related to that particular upgrade if not meta post-mortem could be a good place because these are the key documents that that would be reference when people would try to analyze these data so in doing that we might need to further specify what an informational

AIP is because I don't know if it completely well because in an informational AIP according to EIP one is more of like it's a guideline or well hmm it does say information I thought it would say announcement so yeah it would fit in an informational EIP okay yeah that sounds good we can put it in there anybody else have comments and go backwards and do one on your glacier with you puja yeah yeah I was about to email you for that so I have one more question here before we move on so the

process that we are currently following here for the efi and the VIP centric so where we are getting at should we go ahead and add that to in EAP one or should that be documented as an informational AIP somewhere for this Berlin that's a hard question I don't have an answer because this is exactly what I'm trying to achieve here is like you know a proper place for documenting the process Istanbul is passed so if we will add it in the post-mortem of that

that is quite good quite okay but Berlin is coming up and we may be seeing more future upgrades so we should have a you know decided place I'm okay with keeping it anywhere but that should be the place where we can refer people to go ahead and check what we did there are two paths I can see us taking on this the current because there's a lot of rules that are involved and are there's beginning to be a lot of rules what it used to be is you take it to the core devs they decide it's going in and then we have that complicated non documented process now it's we have EFI and we have champions with specific edicts and we have you know the core devs deal with

this stuff and not this other stuff they deal with technical and not political and we're working on that problem too and putting that all on a IP one I'm always just trying to I have this like protection of e IP one to not make it too much information so that people are turned off to the process or too much information so that people you know most people who read any IP are going to be reading it for ERC's because we really get stuck in this Corey IP stuff but really most e IP Zuri are seized so maybe the informational EAP makes sense right which you just laid back in 81 where you say like you want like here's the process for the Corey IPS and you linked that informational a IP that

describes the eccentric process that's a good idea I'm a little bit I'm I'm not like staunch on this the the and I know I don't have the the vision of the IP one totally and totally but I've liked the idea of expanding it and making it more usable like adding it be the single source of truth for the etherium governance in general and all those things and you're right in that I am way too much in the core the IP so then I over do that stuff I wish there was someone out there that was kind of doing

the same thing but for ERC so we don't exactly have that at the moment but if we like I added in that table of contents and I think there's ways of expanding it even if it got large that it could be quickly not navigatable for people I just start to worry that I worry comes in like two forms one is finding the right information at the right time can be difficult for people so having having it oh well the to get the information for this you actually have to go over there and have them go over there if it's linked in the EIP one that that kind of mitigates that a bit but it still is a little bit harder to find and then the other one is decision making

processes around things like the hard Forks stuff or efi I should we have the same process for changing the IPSec truck model be the same process for changing the IP one that last question we need to figure out how to change the IP one before it can be answered the rest of your question statements I would say it works to be in an informational IP that's set to active status because the IP one does say that some informational and process a I piece such as the IP one maybe an active status so they're never meant to be completed so we would literally have it be a IP and

then whatever number is the one for how champions and efi and whatever we call that umbrella process is four four four core developer decisions and an accord EV meeting etc can be that e IP and it can keep that number forever and if we change it we just do a pull request and you know get consensus on the pull request which we can do easily with the core devs to agree with the process and then it gets changed so it can change as many times or as often as it needs to be and then from me I guess if we made an EFI informational EIP and then I was an

author on it then pretty much I can write it yeah I don't know like if that's the goal or not to go what which is to go off or visit if I if I was an author on a meta AIP that described the semi official efi process in like and how that all that works and I said really I have like the capacity to do that all on my own and I don't know if that it becomes a increase in decentralizing the the information it's the part of the community or if it's a meta maybe but this would be

informational so it doesn't have to be followed but it's something to put down and in this case if you're writing it you're the best person to write it as a hard fork manager so it's not a it's I mean once we have it for in last call anyone can come in and anyone can come in and have objections and make changes and discuss with you but I just the reality is we can't we can't overly focus on the centralization or decentralization aspect because at the end of the day if no one's gonna argue with you no one's gonna argue with you and so we don't need to be taking steps to put to force something into the process we need to give every

opportunity for people to do that but we don't need to it's like openly solicited hardcore okay and then once things are at once it's an active status then I sort of been just updated you would have to do a PR that would have to go through last call then we you would want to specify something like that because currently it wouldn't be that there is there isn't a way to do what I think what you said exactly there isn't there isn't a way to upgrade there isn't a way spoken to upgrade active VIPs not any IP one so how like and this is going to get confusing wording there is not a way to upgrade active II I

he's such as EIP one so the way to upgrade a IP one is specifically set on precedence alone and not on a process that's recorded and the precedents for upgrading EIP one or other active vips of which EIP 1 is the only active VIP is to do pull request for that EIP and have a go to last call and have people agree on it I can make that into a route that was very well said actually articulated yeah there isn't a way to make a pull request be last call on that I actually I created an EIP to document

a possible process for updating active VIPs I think about in December I couldn't link that below oh please do yeah we can definitely use that and this actually goes into a piece that of something I wanted to talk about today so maybe we could yeah go ahead so the idea was we already have a process for putting things into last call so the idea of so the proposal was any change would be made in CID so any IP which didn't go through the IEP process and once it's accepted that that change can be put inside the active VIP it's referencing that's the simplified

version of it I I would argue for a simpler version yeah it's no I you're you're on the right track I would do it just a little bit differently and this is something I've been thinking I wanted to talk about today so as far as editing activity IPS including e IP one getting public feedback and making sure any changes are are are known by the community which currently has been the last call RSS RSS feed but I think it would be useful I wanted to ask the group here if we had some kind of

communication channel whether it be like a Twitter bot or an RSS feed for specifically of changes to active VIPs that then has its own subscription list for a last call for them something like that why would it only need to be for active VIPs because there's a little bit of like if we made an EIP to update any if we made an EIP to change the IP one every time on everything I think that is way too much more overhead and there's a certain loyalty to process that happens among people that I've seen in the e.t.c

community where they're arguing something but from without actually arguing the change itself but arguing the process of the change and then that just spiraled into its own weirdness so I would buy changes to active VIPs and and I and I like this including the VIP centric model as an as an active VIP as as a as part of that same group that those changes I if I was to change the definition for what it means to be EFI I don't think I should make an EIP to make

that edit but I do think that the community should be aware of that edit and be able to respond as kind of a last call thing yes so you don't need to make an EIP for that edit you do need to make a pull request for that edit to upgrade the active VIP and that last call should go into some kind of Twitter bot or something like that that's what you're that's what you're proposing yeah some Twitter bot or RSS feed as right now you can't make a the only way to trigger the RSS feed is for the status of an EIP to go into last call which if I made a pull request so that wasn't adding an EIP it was editing one of these activities it wouldn't have that so then I can't

trigger the RSS feed no you could you would just change the status from active to last call and then it would go back to active after it's either confirmed or denied that the new changes are going in that would still trigger the RSS feed and it wouldn't decouple any other last calls from active because that would complicate things in my opinion you wouldn't you'd have to accept the pull request to trigger the bot yeah you'd have to accept the last call status yes so then I would I would make a PR that makes it last call and then make a PR that makes edits on that last on that that's how it works with ERC's certainly yes however the discussion all happens in magicians

forms hopefully so then I would have I want to make sure I understand this bar so I would make a PR di p1 that the that makes no changes but moves it to last call no no you would have so how it works in an ER C which would be similar to act 2 an act of e IP is you have an a PR that initially puts your data out there your e IP and it's in draft mode as long as it's well-formed then you have a last call status so it goes from draft to last call and then to final and then from there unless you're changing a spelling error it's it's superseded

after that if you want to supersede it so that's how an e rc would work for an active VIP it's actually less steps because the first step for making it at all is to make it a draft and then active or no draft last called an active and then if you want to do changes to it you would do last call if it's if it's approved and then active again but you couldn't trigger your last call without it being approved without merging the EIP yeah you would merge it with the header file just saying last call instead of active so then the EIP would be reflected as in a last call status which is helpful for people visiting that EIP out of the blue to say oh this is changing soon or not changing

and that without you would only but then the changes so then I would need to have a PR that changes it to last call but doesn't have the contents of the change but then having have e a PR that had contents of the change yep exactly the the PR with the contents of the change would be the one that goes to to active again okay that's a little kind of confusing yeah we should make it with number one we should make a graph for the current process and number two we should change it maybe yeah and I like the idea of like a Twitter bot or something or or adding in I don't know it it makes sense that this has its own process and its

own subscription feed cool we spent way too much time on this we should time box there's anything else on that we'll need to take a lot of that offline or in the telegram so we only have a few minutes left but update on proposed changes to e IP one I think we can skip that because we've been going over that off and on today and we'll need to recollect our thoughts and go through the notes and kind of you know list them out before we talk about them again survey on the EIP process that is oh we already have a form cool for some reason oh we did we

made this before I remember this now has anyone replied to that or have we not sent it out I forgot where we were on that so we haven't send out yet I think Tim posted in in the cat herders yeah we did add it in the biweekly newsletter this week but with you I have no visibility of if we received any response to that or not there hasn't actually been a response yet but I linked the latest form if you guys could give it the final okay we started setting it out I like how simple it is I

would say I would say that we need something so that if people so at the very top we need to talk about the EIP IP process and say this is where you can go for more info and it's happening right now because as many opportunities as we can take to say join us we need to do that because otherwise there's going to be this implicit just stigma around oh you did this without the community and all this other stuff that can very easily happen if we don't push this everywhere all right sounds good I think that links don't show up in the description but you put the URL short yeah and most of the developers

are there so we can share them and ask them to give their feedback yeah we can do that sounds good um any other final thoughts final comments on the forum I like how simple it is we might do follow-up forms with people leaving their contact information and we need more specifics I should say we might not review the action items from a IP meeting 5 I forgot where actions are are they at the bottom or was it just no

actually that was supposed to be here only in the summary section but in the last meeting we discussed about two major topics that was one migration of the IP content that we actually covered and the second was the motivation so I don't think we do have much action item over there from the last meeting ok we'll have some for this time so I think oh you're taking notes just put it as action items and then also if we if we have any left off from EIP meeting three riad those please of course ok any other final business yeah just if we got a sec just one question for Sam Richards thanks for putting together that what

was it a notion deso summary of your proposal because it was a fact that that whole conversation and it was nice to see that summary but and I notice somewhere you're asking for comment if I want to say yeah I'm for this can I add that as a comment summers or anything like yeah so you should have the ability in the notion document to essentially like if you highlight any piece of text you should be able to input a comment oh let me know if you have issues that I know like the tool fatigue another new tool I personally like notion but again

yeah happy to change the format and it sounds like once we do have a more firm like how-to implementation strategy we do plan to open it up as a github issue in the EIP repo and that should be like a friendly and familiar place for people to add input ok cool thanks yeah yeah and just a plug for canonize err here if you want us to helps because if if you put something like this in Canon Iser then everyone who supports that could like it's like a petition people can sign it and there's also a place for people with a different point of view can create a competing camp and sign that so you can keep track of that what they want and what's required to get

them on board and track when they jump camp and get on board and all that kind of stuff but anyway I'll shut up now thanks I'll check that out oh sorry I was meeting okay sounds good and I see there's been some color changes on here so yeah I think that's about it thanks everyone will meet again in two weeks thank you thanks and Cheers