Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

EIPIP Meeting 94 #292

Closed
6 of 10 tasks
poojaranjan opened this issue Nov 1, 2023 · 6 comments
Closed
6 of 10 tasks

EIPIP Meeting 94 #292

poojaranjan opened this issue Nov 1, 2023 · 6 comments

Comments

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member

poojaranjan commented Nov 1, 2023

Date and Time

Nov 15, 2023 at 15:30 UTC

Location

Zoom: TBA in the Discord #eip-editing channel

YouTube Live Stream/Recording: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4cwHXAawZxpLrRIkDlBjDUUrGgF91pQw

Agenda

1. Discuss Open Issues/PRs, and other topics

Call for Input

Call For Input Status Result Comments
#283 Open - Active for collecting responses (till Nov 16)
#286 Open - Active for collecting responses (till Nov 19)
#287 Open - Active for collecting responses (till Nov 19)
#289 Deadline complete. 2 responses received in favor of withdrawing EIP-7199. - Active for collecting responses (till Nov 14)
#293 Open - Active for collecting responses (till Dec 09)
  • security-related EIP modifications Ref. comment and here

Changes to Final proposals

Manual Merge
TBA

2. Discussion continued or updates from past meetings

TBA

3. EIPs Insight - Monthly EIPs status reporting.

4. EIP Editing Office Hour

  • Agenda Meeting 28 & Recording Meeting 27
  • Rename it to ERC Office Hour?
  • Can we merge All ERC Dev Meeting & EIP Editing Office Hour?

5. Review action items from earlier meetings

6. Announcement

ERC@Devconnect

@poojaranjan poojaranjan mentioned this issue Nov 1, 2023
15 tasks
@Dexaran
Copy link

Dexaran commented Nov 6, 2023

I would like to add "security related EIP modifications" to the agenda. I wrote a draft for a proposal to update EIP process here: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/modification-of-eip-process-to-account-for-security-treatments/16265/2

The idea is as follows:

  • Make "Security Considerations" section of EIPs mutable even after the EIP is assigned final status. Security Considerations must be treated as "living".
  • Develop an Ethereum Security Guideline (a new EIP that will describe security rules) so that EIP editors could benchmark proposals against it even without deep technical knowledge.

I have a security auditing organization (https://audits.callisto.network/), the necessary expertise in the area and a team that can work on the development of security guidelines. We would like to start the discussion and gather feedbacks.

@abcoathup
Copy link

  • Make "Security Considerations" section of EIPs mutable even after the EIP is assigned final status. Security Considerations must be treated as "living".

I'd like Security Considerations & Implementations sections to link to a wiki post on Ethereum Magicians (https://meta.discourse.org/t/what-is-a-wiki-post/30801), similar to the link to Discussions. This enables these sections to be updated/maintained as appropriate by the community without changing final EIP/ERCs.

@abcoathup
Copy link

Is the "associate" role defined anywhere?
I can't make these meetings as they are incompatible with waking hours in Australia.

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

@abcoathup

Editor Associate is not a formal position and is not listed on EIP-1.

This is added to indicate the user contributing to EIP/ERC reviewing and aspires to be an EIP Editor. This is also used as a tag on ECH Discord to add permissions.

A brief description of "who" and "roles" are added to an unofficial Reviewers sheet so it's helpful to keep track of.

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

poojaranjan commented Nov 15, 2023

Summary

1. Discuss Open Issues/PRs, and other topics

EIP-ERC repo split

@Pandapip1 will be looking into tooling

Web Page Rendering for EIP & ERC

@Pandapip1 shared

  • One website, but each repository will control how are the webpages rendered.
  • Each working group gets to decide what should be displayed on the webpage.

Topic Group

@SamWilsn shared

  • working on a prototype of how it should work
  • 1 repo for each working group
  • looks similar to EIP/ERC split
  • will make sure of tooling working before the split
  • will share and get editors' approval
  • Check EIPs WG if anyone wants to follow along with working group development.

EIP Editors & Associates based on repo split.

@poojaranjan shared response added here

Call for Input

@SamWilsn shared

283

  • Whoever voted are in favor
  • Voting deadline ends tomorrow

286

  • 2 votes in favor
  • Responses accepted till Nov 19

287

  • A lot on discussion thread
  • preferred solution - moving in the reference implementations
  • Responses accepted till Nov 19

289

  • Deadline complete. 2 responses received in favor of withdrawing EIP-7199.
  • Merging that PR

291

  • Responses accepted till Nov 19

293

  • Responses accepted till Dec 09

@Pandapip1 shared the idea of a shorter deadline for Call For Input for certain categories of issues.

  • The decision could be reverted if people disagree.
  • Maybe for changes that don't leave a side effect when reverted.
  • @SamWilsn will give more thought and EIP-5069 can be updated as agreed upon.

security-related EIP modifications

  • Vladimir Vencálek shared the issue and proposed solution.
  • The proposal is summarized here
  • Lot of discussion, watch the recording for details.
  • No decision made. Open for continued discussion on FEM.

Changes to Final proposals

223

  • @SamWilsn will merge it tomorrow, if nobody objects

57

  • Merged

66

  • Merged
  • A bit of discussion on Created date, follow the recording, if interested.
  • @Pandapip1 proposed an idea of allowing updating Final EIP for clarity of potential users.
  • @SamWilsn isn't in favor and explained why "no"
  • Could not reach any decision as we ran out of time.
  • Will be included in the next meeting agenda.

EIPIP meeting 94 Chat.txt

Next meeting Nov 29, 2023 at 16:00 UTC

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Member Author

Closing in favor of #297

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants