On Monday, October 21, 2013 7:38:37 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote: > 1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)?
Probably wouldn't hurt, but it'd likely need a rewrite in a more modular and formal form. > 2) Should the current wiki pages be taken down / forwarded to the git repo > or be auto updated from the git repo? Since it's the same format, I'd keep it up there, maybe with a link to the git repo on the main BIP index wiki page. > 3) Even though the information in BIP 50 is valuable, should it really be > considered a BIP? It's a hardforking protocol change, so IMO yes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
