EIPIP Meeting 70

Transcript

welcome to eitip meeting number 70 I have shared agenda in chat we have few items for discussion suggested by Sam and Victor uh so have included only open items because by the time we have this meeting a few of them are already closed so starting from the first item which is about update EIP 3475 I'm sharing the link here in the chat for reference uh it was suggested by Sam so Sam if you quickly like to give one minute uh intro or overview for this and then we can start discussing the issue sure it's so we're changing our final EIP

um and I just wanted to check if anybody has any opinions about it this looks like okay yeah this looks like an EIT which was merged recently it's not been old but yeah yeah they're mostly just changing the comments that um with the examples I think I overspoken over Lifeline Matt

can you please repeat I was just saying I haven't reviewed this PR so I'm just taking a look at it right now I I generally don't want to change final eaps so I don't know it feels like they should have had the comments that they wanted in there when they moved it to final I think if uh if this meeting is about uh General policy then um maybe that will be even more helpful

is that we lay out the principles of uh what when do we agreed on that is okay to modify it or not and then I think for individual loans if they can later be applied with those principles that editors agree with we've had a good uh is that a good understanding of the purpose of the city yeah it's it's process improvements and and similar things so um my general policies don't edit finally IPS um yeah so I was mentioning this in the last

meeting like um sometimes when proposals are not getting enough reviews probably on the review comment or we comment in General on discussion to thread and it keeps moving to one status to another status chances of moving them into final they move faster but we may miss some obvious points I wonder if we should recommend like editor should recommend any um ballpark time period for consideration for these kind of proposals so we do not have to edit final eips but we make all

the edits before that I think I'm on my client side with this I don't think adding a time period is the right approach um I I like it'll just slow it down and still know what is going to look at it um that's kind of why I started that peer review kind of process that I'm trying out um so we'll see if that helps catch some issues that's a good point I think I have added peer review in today's just because we can probably get more cards over there but just for information for people listening to this call generally speaking um recommendation for changes in the

final status proposals we have added a feedbacks from editors from earlier meeting and according to this a final EIT May accept non-normative changes however it is again best to avoid any changes to final proposal so if there are more than like smaller changes it was recommended earlier to come up with a new proposal altogether than just trying to edit these proposals but obviously given this uh proposal this is relatively new and we can obviously collect feedback from more editors and we could also just leave it like I

don't really think we need to have a decision on it it's not hurting anybody if the pr is open oh sounds good all right moving on to the next one is Eid tags level topic I suppose this was suggested by Victor I'm sorry I'm sharing the link here in the chat so yeah Victor if you would like to give one minute intro and then it can be easier for people it is let me check I um oh I I don't think I'd suggested this topic

um but yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah maybe it's it's kind of people um but I can understand the uh the interest of adding tag um but yeah maybe it will let maybe to end up able to explain a bit more I I have lost you and I've not seen this uh propose again looks like this has been added to issue number 6037 this is a proposal so yeah if people can give their feedback thoughts on the issue we can take it from there if if

there is any comment for today yeah yeah I'll leave a comment on the issue all right that will lead us to the peer review uh discussion uh on calculus Discord there was this discussion for peer review like uh should proposal get more reviews there was also proposal of Junior reviewer probably Romance by domain specific reviewer and copy editor kind of thing so yeah Sam you mentioned that you are already working in that direction so if you can sort of yeah so I think adding another level of editors

is not useful unless we um have some kind of a Q system like um if we just have people who are you know copy editing or whatever but we don't have a way to like flag an EIP is ready for like senior editor review then I don't think it's actually going to help but it's not going to make anything easier um so I think if we wanted to do like multiple levels of editors and then like eips get promoted that I might be okay with but just adding Junior editors I think is just it's not really going to help that much people can already comment on PRS and provide feedback if they want to

um but I have tried to organize kind of a peer review list so there's a hack MD that I've given to the editors um of people who have volunteered to read and comment on the technical side of VIPs um this is in response to Greg's uh comment that we don't have it up here reviewers or or we don't get enough peer reviews so it's broken down into a few categories like nfts and execution clients stuff like that and uh yeah if you um like merger PR from draft or or merge a draft PR nope that's wrong too virgin EIP that is is in draft um tag somebody from that list and uh so

far it's been working reasonably well I've gotten um two people to reply with peer review feedback and uh yeah see people seem genuinely pretty excited to work on it so uh yeah just a new resource for editors so feel free to go and start using it what's the Avenue for like sharing this information is it on like Discord or telegram reviewers GitHub uh no I mean like how like what is your process right now for like connecting the reviewers with oh I uh things like like I said there's a hack MD so I just grab uh somebody from a relevant topic

um make a comment on the discussion thread um with their you can just username and then they usually okay yeah it's very informal there's no um no real process for it yeah um yeah that's really cool how'd you have the list uh I have it on Discord somewhere I need to find it yeah I'll maybe be something more formal at some point but uh for now I think we can deal with this yeah I really like the idea of having fewer reviews um peer reviews uh provides better um

sense of contributions and also um like I kind of want to also advocating uh Advocate some um sentiments in the in the author group that um if you author it's actually your responsibility to research and consult and like ask for peer reviews like that's what I'm trying to deal with some of my the new vip's and then so we can over time in the process like look at erc's see who they nominate um and then so it's a peer-nominated peer review list that we can grow and yeah and also also I don't agree with the like clients about

um maybe we could think about where we can publish that list so people get more visibility of hey there's a thing of your video and you can contribute here because you add on your species the value of that type of thing yeah I'll um I'll work on um the message I'm posting a little bit like to like there's already a call for authors to also sign up for the list but I'll I'll refine them a little bit more and yeah because I think I think getting more people to participate is important and um getting authors to nominate people is also probably fairly useful so yeah I think thinking that we can borrow hand the poison and cat characters alongside

they they have very good experience and soliciting have very true um well thank you no thank you Victor and thanks Sam for this initiative I mean this has done definitely a good idea the issue of not getting enough reviews or maybe not getting enough for constructive feedback uh was always mentioned by EAP authors so especially for new Waters who are trying to do it for the first time so it seems very valuable for them to get it more reviews and um I guess if we have this list readily available

we will start sharing it with new Authors that if you would like to tag any offer in the available reviews that would be nice you can get more reviews there okay um I see a comment over here um my moody moody if you would like to mention that um I guess it's generally a suggestion yeah but please go ahead yeah I'm just uh like like one thing we would like to do even swap is just start contributing more uh to like eips that are related to like smart contract interfaces

um we would love that but like we I think as a company we don't like have like a good feed of like what's going in that's relevant to us and there's a lot of eips and some of them or most of them probably aren't uh relevant to us um so like it'd be nice to have so so today for like a GitHub PRS for example we have slack channels and then uh we have a GitHub uh application that we can subscribe to like certain repos uh commits output requests Etc like it'd be really cool to have something similar for um VIPs where we could just like type a

command to subscribe to uh yeah please and just get like the abstract dropped into the into the channel like uh yeah I bought drops in like pull requests summaries um into the slack Channel and so it's like pretty easy to know what you need to click um so just like if there's something like that that other companies can also use I feel like that would help a lot with just getting more participation um but I'm not sure exactly how it's best built it seems like a GitHub action would have to be creative though that posts to Discord or something yeah

yeah it would be unfortunate if I had to be like per like org so maybe there should be like uh EIP editor maintained Slack uh application or something like that so that people can just come and register this like application and then subscribe to eaps so could we ping you for eaps that we think might be relevant to you or would you want something automated like there aren't that many eips I think we get like what maybe maybe 15 a month or something like that or is it more than that yeah

I think around there yeah I think we can manually ping you um it's just we need to know who to pay and what username to use and and what topics they'd be interested in yeah I mean that that works for just unit swap but I'm imagining like if if like open C and other developers also want to get well like if you want to get participation from many different applications true true specs it's just uh helpful to have like a tool where we can like set it up and then also I'm not necessarily going to be the one who reads it it could be like anyone who's interested in that particular topic um like at the unisoft team so it's it's really nice to have just a slack Channel

where you can see the abstracts and choose which ones you click yeah that makes sense I'll see what we can set up um I'll do a little bit of research there so I have a question here um I like this information that uh could be useful for application team um at what level this information you are looking for because there could be you know numerous amounts of things going out so if there is any specific requirement maybe at any specific status um I think like merged I guess it'd be nice to people who configure it but like probably right away just like merged eips there and draft uh like being able to choose

like a category um and then like a subcategory um for the subscription and and then I think the most important thing to just have in the message that goes to the slide channel would be like the abstract um but yeah like the more customizable the better because I'm getting on multiple Channels with like different people in the channels um everyone could sort of customizable I want to see right I can think of something like this like maybe we can create a GitHub channel that could be automated by a bar in which they can probably add ERC specific comments or a merch when it

happens could be added over there but customization we may want to look further into it and just FYI as like and was mentioning we do have an RSS feed available on eipstvm.org I'm sharing the link right here that is for last call only so uh in case uh that is helpful at least for the time being any ERC proposal getting into last call that means that is there for another 14 days um Team can probably add TSC back stocks yeah I think we could build something on top of it or I guess we could there's probably like an RSS like slackbot

already that exists um yeah I mean yeah I think that yeah if that exists I think that would be the best way to go forward I think we can expose different things lately we want to have an RSS feed just for application stuff we could do that and yeah I think that that would be better just so that it's like pretty um yeah agnostic and it's just like here's a place to consume this information yeah if you could if you could just break it out by category and subcategory um that'd be really cool actually it might be possible I guess this is built by Jekyll maybe you could have it by status too it was

not just last call right yeah totally yeah this is a good idea it looks like it looks like there's ways of adding RSO speeds to slack so I think this is like a very good way of moving forward with this perfect foreign would be like having those different side channels and we can and then on our side we can like subscribe to the one that

exists yeah we'll see what we can do for getting the RSS feeds to be more more verbose or have more content in them so yeah thank you thank you um so yeah this is a very good discussion here I probably wish you to look into getting more RSS feed depending upon category and Status right now we have it only for the last call thank you diagram for sharing the article I hope that would be helpful for people who are interested in looking into building up their song all right uh moving on to item number

two um this is from discussion contribute for earlier meetings uh there were two items suggested by uh Victor but it looks like the one 5980 is already merged so we are here with another one which is um add Twitter as an EIT editor um yeah Victor if you would like to share more from where we were on the last time we visited this item and where we are now and then again maybe yeah have opinion of other editors oh yeah I think that last time while we were discussing that having having me as an editor

um I think kind of nominated as a practice and supporting Sanders and support too and then uh but I think that PR was merged on maturity uh but you didn't get to hear uh What uh platform thing and then so I'll kind of realize that uh I haven't worked with lifetime uh for a long enough to kind of show what I but I uh what I do I have some if I wear half-up attitude so I think after two two months uh I think it's a I work with the supply like mine a little bit more and I just want to get it out with other

people think in the room how do you cut out can I show your people oh no I'm done speaking okay I guess I'll Pace today man I just can't put it out there on the table yeah okay um so I think the only thing that's changed on my friend is um and I I don't want this to come across as like offensive or anything but I am

somewhat concerned about philosophical alignment um and I I do want to have a more focused discussion about that um and you know from from like a um editor perspective I think you're great you do really good work you give good feedback uh you attend the process more more than most editors do so um I think my only concern is is making sure that you know we we want to build the same thing um I'm not exactly sure how to approach that kind of a discussion and I'm not sure if we should do it without more editors and if Matt isn't here then I don't know if Matt is still here um but yeah yeah I mean I think that I agree with

you Sam I think yeah you've been great with the like editing part of the process but amazingly absolutely amazing yeah I I just think that editors should be more involved with like ethereum as a whole and more philosophically aligned with ethereum's values and I'm not sure if like the alignment is there currently so to like turn this into an actual like actionable thing that we can talk about what kind of alignment things are you most concerned

about and then Victor what would you say like how do you feel about those things yeah of course I'm happy to hear it um but uh what you have in mind so so the biggest example for me is the discussion about linking to non-free resources and you know I think you and Greg are are fairly aligned on it which is interesting because Greg's already an editor um but for me it's like you know it should be as cheap as possible to build ethereum and you know free and open access and not linking to paywall sources and everything um and and I think you are a little bit more relaxed on that kind of a thing and

that that's actually what made me a little bit concerned about philosophical alignment so I wanted to talk about things like licensing and and all of that so that that's where I'm coming from I don't know if Matt's feeling the same or not yeah I feel similarly and for me I also feel like the ERC that you authored a few months ago about creating a standard for applications to understand sanction lists that to me I find like concerning coming from somebody who is like wanting to be an editor because I feel like this is like very much against the values of ethereum overall and yeah that's another piece of concern for me

so let me first address uh where I come from and then what I think uh what I think my philosophy is that you can assess whether that is um that is what you're looking for so um I come from contributing to Wikipedia um and then so I have a very the Um passion about being open and I do have a few essays about open contributor community and then um being open in a sense that um it's um in a sense that I felt that we need to allow people to contribute as easy as

possible um so and that's to begin with and some of our policies align with that some of our policy um didn't like I personally felt it in line with that because sometimes when we when we are in close requirement for example like sample we debate about external links or uh whether the link needs to be free I felt like that you have a strong sense of of being requiring the Solace to be to be accessible which I totally agree I kind of hold the philosophical approach that we take these kind of things gradually like we allow people we

instead of having a hard more of hey if you're not free you're not entering like we are going to build isolated Islands to avoid us to interact with any people who are not strictly the same deals with us which is more of a life like I think it's more of the G uh gnu or like GPL type of philosophy philosophy I'm more on the MIT licensed the SDA license side like Let Me Be Free like if you're a good guy I'm I want you to be able to use this I want you to be able to contribute with us but if you happen to be a bad guy like I'm kind of okay to being abused a little bit like

um so long as you don't get into us that that's my my type of thing so but we will I I'm I'm hoping to build a gradient of incentives so that people will do the good things like that's why when I talk to you hey how about we do um if you have a free list if you have a have a free version cheaper version you should link to the cheaper version so we build this gradient of incentive so that's the type of thing and then the other thing is like clients uh when I address the jurisdiction um and that's not what I meant to them to to sanction uh or to to help sanction

I I want this to be clear that that purpose the purpose is avoiding or massively avoiding people trying to do section on the core level like you will see application layer the form of sanction okay um any time and anyhow and then my feel is that if we build a um safer net so that at least people who are concerned of their jurisdictions can still use ethereum then they're not they will be less pressure on um on kind of asking the core to to change or to to to

um to be able to sanction um transactions so what my view here is that I take a two-layer approach on the core we should be very strong about non-sanction we should be resistance of sexual and even build a strong algorithm to to add incentive to against sanction uh censorship but on the application layer we should realize that there's companies there is dials that want to have their own jurisdictions some of the doubt or there might be countries that in that night so that's kind of my philosophical uh views but let me take one step back um and I think the court might believe uh is even more important than these two

I think it's considered more of a details if I may say my core belief is community should be open to contributors but it's not freely open the entry evaluators should be based on contributions um just like Apache Community has this principle that everyone can contribute but Authority comes from but Authority and Trust are earned not uh for bike for granted it's earned by contributions so that's what I I believe one open contributor Community admission and the step and the second deal that's not philosophically is that I believe in

consensus it's strongly impure consensus so that's why I kind of create the voting standard and and like at least not trying to like advocate for voting schedule on channel governance and if you see a lot of my EIP authorship it's all about kind of how you help governance governance so that people can do it decentralizedly but my view is that people should be able to come into consensus and at least um you should there's two ways to do that in society it's either a more Major Tool it's it's Catholics and it's it's bizarre like classes Bazaar um these essays I'll talk about that I believe that you I I'm more confident

and then in that sense uh we should be able to come to consensus um and that's why I was surprised in the hike when I debate with panda pit like you probably see my debate like I I fight uh 100 in in the discussion about external links or like quite strong about I want people to be able to link because I come from a Wikipedia sense I want to do a connected world not isolated work world of knowledge and then I was surprised by pentatives when he nominated me as editor even though I strongly disagree with him on how we should deal with links and that's why I felt I kind of um

being welcomed in the EIP process because even though some of the ideas we might disagree um I still felt that this group will come diverse diversity of ideas diversity of views so long as the core value as you might be concerned like so long as the core value we agree upon and then for a core value I believe uh for myself is that we should be open to contributors and we should be able to Value consensus like what I would not do is I will not try to depend when editors or when someone I

work with creates a policy I will not unilaterally act different from the policy I will try to interpret the policy as is as much as I can but I'll I'll find in a debate when I disagree with the policy but in actions I will follow the policy that even if I disagree with which I hope that if you work with me you will notice that I I'm enforcing when I noticed that people that added a group of tweet that there's no way to pause that's that's not where I come from I would disagree my view but once the discussion is done conclusion is up I will follow what um

the government's body that I'm participating with about the decisions that's the two core values I have and I'm I'm just talking here in order to hear what you think so I think you touched on um the the topic that I'm most concerned about um and that is uh while I do think anybody should be able to contribute to the eaps repository I don't think that that is the like core purpose of it right like we're a little bit different from other standards organizations and from other like communities because we the people who write eips are often not the people who are like especially

for core eaps they're not the people who are going to be consuming them so like I think we need to focus on like resiliency and and um accessibility and this like those things come before the openness to contribute contributions for me and I would rather turn away eips or proposals that don't meet our bar for Quality then have like eips that don't meet those bars so like I I really don't like having any Links at all in the IPS I I think that

it's going to like subvert the like um kind of my core idea of VIPs being a silo of information that isn't danger connected to anything else and I I think that you know if you want to bring this idea of interconnected knowledge and and linking everything I think that's completely that's probably the biggest philosophical difference is that I want the eip's repository to stand alone not be linked to anything and only with that be able to recreate ethereum and I think that's a very different goal from what you want to have if with the eaps Repository I think I I hear you and I respect what what you say and then if if that is

what um our glutenants of course I I'll follow that yeah I I do I do see that um that uh in some cases people were refrained from being able to link to consensus back which we are addressed I know um but um I I kind of want to use the friction like at the at the philosophical like at the level that we allow um but yeah I I agree with you if you if you uh if what this group wants or what the ethereums in general wants is what this EIP Repository to um to be able to review and sell people be

able to do ethereum itself um I yeah I I can understand and then um that I I wouldn't contest that so that doesn't context with um the core value that I have is for open contributors because you if you look at from the other perspective um it's allowing people who have might not have internet access or might not be able to access the paywall to be able to contribute so I would say the link is more kind of detail now core philosophy um I I don't think it conscious uh yeah I can adjust understanding I have to understand English yeah I mean so even if your personal beliefs don't exactly

line up if you're willing to offer like if you're willing to approach the EIP process with the idea that like the goal of the EIP process is to create a body of standards that like Will Survive like an apocalypse then I think you know we can probably work together and I think you'd like I'd support your editorship whatever the right term is um contributorship I think well like you know like you becoming an editor like oh oh yeah I think you know your personal beliefs aside if you're willing to operate on the eip's repository with like the shared goal of creating a resilient available like durable platform um first and then um your your personal belief second I

think you know I I'd be totally fine with you being an editor thank you and actually that's my according to me my core beliefs just like you said is that when you operate in a collaborating environment um and then if you are acting as a rule enforcer you should enforce the rule made by people you should follow the value made by people together like that's that's the core of the core for me um and then even even though you personally disagree with that and then I I wonder if I I make it clear that's uh that's exactly what I believe damn

no I think you made it clear um so I hate to do this to you but I don't think that we can make a decision today I I don't think we have enough like we need at least Greg or Panda or somebody else to chime in so maybe we open a a thread on Discord or something um just to gather everybody else's opinion um it would be nice to have a third person that attends these meetings regularly so um yeah I mean we need to resolve that like the point of moving the meeting was for panda to come and I think yeah we should we need to figure out a time for panda to come yeah and I mean like we were talking about having like a special

meeting for panda and I tried to reach out and coordinate a date and that has gone nowhere so yeah we have to figure that out um but yeah I guess so I just want us I just want to say that I think maybe with panda being added as an editor like relatively quickly like maybe we set a bit of a precedent of editors being added fast and historically that's like not really the case like we've had people you know I think it was for me it was around a year Micah I was kind of doing stuff for like multiple years before he became an editor I don't think that you know this has to be something that happens like quickly I think that editors are people who are like just

deeply involved with the space anyways and you know are good like Guardians the process because they like go through the process and they are they do the process they understand it and so it feels like you know a little contrived it's just like add people as editors just add editors and not add people who are you know really living through the process for like a long period of time if anybody's the precedent for being added quickly it was me foreign yeah but I mean you've also gone through the EAP process for a long time oh yeah like I I think I added myself in like a week

so yeah but uh yeah I mean let's you know I I think you've done a good job of making me feel more comfortable with it Victor um let's try to get you know everybody involved and have more of a discussion about it and hopefully we can come to a consensus soon of course of course yeah thank you very much um just one last thing um I just want to have a chance to kind of discuss it throughout my client about um the kind of did I address you uh did I address the concern or like do you want

to discuss a little bit more about what the what the VIP about the jurisdiction and uh sovereignty is part of uh question um I I I don't want to discuss it more in this call I think we should like move on but I think from what I heard I just generally still like you know don't feel like you're very aligned with things I think that on-chain voting is not aligned I think on-chain voting doesn't work very well in general and it's not like a good thing to be focusing on I think that trying to build this sanctions list to stop the core protocol from being sanctioned is the wrong approach I think there are other

approaches to avoid you know to create a platform that's censorship resistant and Alliant people who are aligned to like understand this or who evolved or the processes are working on those things and so I think that you're outside the loop in that case so I can see there is a number assigned to it I guess it's a pull request number five seven or three probably a weekend um try to add more thoughts from other editors what they think at this point of time or um do we need to have any other discussion thread okay

I think we do have a place so let's call request number we can have it over there but if we feel strongly to have another discussion threat in in general opinion probably we can start with Fellowship of Athena magician hoping this is a good point to maybe move on to the next item uh in the essence of time just wanted to make sure a vector are you comfortable with the discussion we had today and yeah yeah of course thank you for having everybody to talk about it and share your friend feedback we look forward to uh yeah I have no

discussions either I want to support or on some other calls what event thank you everyone so the next uh sub item here mentioned is EAP number allocation we have very well aware that EAP number allocation is on EAP editors they can allocate numbers we saw some cases of the spotting numbers and trying to snip a number which is not the right thing to do and the process there was not right so I I totally understand punishing um number grabbing ideas or opportunities and allocating them a different number

but I was wondering like in general uh do we need to just remove the number because I've came across a case um actually I came across more than one but I could find only one and the other one is last number is five five five so it was just a good issue number and it was mentioned that okay this is the condition number so we are just taking it off of the list however there was another PR which was 6000 and um it seemed that author tried to trick so he was allocated at different EIP number I am generally curious to understand like if someone is getting any number by the

right process should or should not be there any case like we should be AIP editor should be allocating a new number or is this a good idea to maybe remove the better numbers from the list um I think the best solution is to build the bot we keep talking about I get that I I wanted to touch quickly touch on that area as well like uh this EAP number part I may have missed this thing but do we have a process in place I just wanted to get to know that so we can start sharing it with people we have and if anyone's interested right right now we are just saying that we want a EIP number bot but what do we want to

have in that and what is the process do we have any thoughts around it sorry I just realized this k06a guy posted like eight PR's to try and get six thousand that's right and that's why he was like not allocated that number this is the right thing to do uh but there are other cases in which someone is getting the good number for like genuine process and still it was not allocated to that person so yeah yeah please go ahead

has it been discussed like just actioning the numbers off or something like yeah Mica was an advocate for that I mean you could just have like an ens registry where people can just like buy it and then proves they own it and that could be how the bot like assigns a number uh an idea the funding can just go to like grants or funding people's time for they spend on editing it just if people want it like why not let them have it but just have a better like a more Fair Way Fair Way

of allocating that I think this is going to open up a lot of different things and I would rather avoid it I would rather create an external counter for EAP numbers and just assign them individually I mean why not just make them random then like have a bot assign random like often America identifiers there says it just seems really stupid that we're having so many problems and debating numbers like there's so many standard bodies that just assigned

numbers this isn't a problem but for some reason we're like wanting to game the system and create a bunch of mechanism around it maybe this is something that I would like to bring the Brink's meeting as well to collect more thoughts around like what is the general process of VIP number part that we are considering and uh yeah oh I think the only evaluation is the only implementation we're considering for the IP number bot is in the commit where it's merged um that's where the number is assigned uh like the first draft is merged that's where the numbers assigned and it's assigned to the highest value plus one of an EIP that exists in the Repository I mean I feel like we should just start

doing this right now but use you know until we get the Bots just use a hack MD or a spreadsheet or something would you I mean how could you do that with a bot like are you gonna like merge eipx and then have the bot commit to master or main um immediately after no so the bot would create the merge commit and assign the EIP number in the merge command thoughts are cool I think we can set this up in five minutes for the hack MD and just with one editor assigns a

number just do that like I think that's a good starting place you're wasting so many numbers by assigning by a PR crazy the only problem with that approach is you don't know what the number is going to be until you you merge it right and well I'm not saying I don't think it has to be assigned at merge I think it could be assigned when editor reviews it and they'll just go look at that document and every time it never gets merged this is not like that big a deal it's way better than this world where we have where a person can just like bump the numbers yeah you know every number go ahead Maybe

well people still try to game whatever process you have in hack MD like it'll be less capable than what we have now though right because other people won't be able to see the hack MD where they can see the GitHub number and yeah yeah I mean you could like why not just make it random do they have to be sequential no it's just a nice property to keep them sequential but we could make them random I don't really keep them sequential like I think it gives nice temporal property of things to you know to a degree you can know roughly how old the eib is

based on the number yeah like it doesn't give that much information but it just feels like we go random then yeah we're like pretty uh in a pretty adversarial mindset about the process which I think is not a not the right way to approach it all right so yeah I I think they can I just start doing this they happen to process yeah I I have no objections all right I'll post on Discord I can't

imagine that Panda pip is going to be against it and I don't think Greg cares all right so yeah yeah anyway education is uh I think whatever process they agree should be fine maybe we can have a small discussion on Discord all right I think that's all the time we had I just quickly want to mention one other thing um the EIP is inside.com website actually it is eits inside.com uh website is active right now it shows the

um latest month information I'm going to quickly share here the link right now it is showing the list of proposals in draft final review last call and stagnant total number of proposals and if we click into this proposals we will get to know the name and description plus the pull request number it is basically an automation of the hack into file that I was sharing earlier every month but this seems to be more automated process and I think it is more reliable than the happening because secondly I don't do it every day but this is done by bot so hopefully this will help I would be curious to hear more thoughts not in this call obviously people if they would like to see some

other stats related to EIP um we can probably add that so yeah to let us know if there are any other feature that you would like to be added um Sam already shared a few and um we have listed it here hopefully we can start looking into uh um that is the right eye candy so here we have added code new uh properties to be added to this website if there are any thoughts on this or any new thing that can be added to make it uh better the website um what do you want feedback

oh no I'm just saying on on the present eip's inside website and if anything else can be added on that I have added whatever where do you want feedback right now we can collect it on DM but definitely I will start uh I will start a form Google form in which people can add their feedback and I think this website contains that uh thing contact us there people can message sounds good okay thank you so much Shiva I should have thought of the form earlier but contact us can share the information with the team if you just have like a GitHub issue or something that would also work yep we can do that thank you whatever works for you guys like yeah it looks

great I'm really excited about it thank you well thank you everyone for joining us today I hope to share the recording very soon see you all in two weeks have a good one everyone