Perhaps having authors consent to certain types of changes when they submit their BIP?
> On Sep 27, 2017, at 1:20 PM, Sjors Provoost via bitcoin-dev > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > >> Op 27 sep. 2017, om 22:01 heeft Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev >> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> het volgende geschreven: >> >>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev >>> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >>> What do people think about modifying BIP 2 to allow editors to merge these >>> kinds of changes without involving the Authors? Strictly speaking, BIP 2 >>> shouldn't be changed now that it is Active, but for such a minor revision, I >>> think an exception is reasonable. >> >> Even minor revisions can not change the meaning of text. Changing a single >> word can often have a strange impact on the meaning of the text. There >> should be some amount of care exercised here. Maybe it would be okay as long >> as edits are mentioned in the changelog at the bottom of each document, or >> mention that the primary authors have not reviewed suggested changes, or >> something as much; otherwise the reader might not be aware to check revision >> history to see what's going on. > > Perhaps it's enough to @mention authors in the PR and give them a week to > object before merging? > > Sjors > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
