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

Call for Input: Update ERC-6492 (Final) Reference Implementation #321

Closed
SamWilsn opened this issue Feb 21, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed

Call for Input: Update ERC-6492 (Final) Reference Implementation #321

SamWilsn opened this issue Feb 21, 2024 · 7 comments

Comments

@SamWilsn
Copy link
Collaborator

Call for Input

Decision

Do we merge ethereum/ERCs#267 ?

If Affirmed

ERC-6492's reference implementation is updated.

If Rejected No change.
Method Rough Consensus
Deadline March 22th, 2024
@SamWilsn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

For the same reasons I mention in #291 (comment) I am opposed to merging this pull request.

@g11tech
Copy link

g11tech commented Feb 22, 2024

reference implementation change and notices (security considerations for e.g. in 291) we should be able to update, will keep EIPs fresh but we need a good process to verify such a change

This was referenced Mar 13, 2024
@SamWilsn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

SamWilsn commented Apr 3, 2024

So is your opinion here, @g11tech, that we should or should not merge this PR?

@g11tech
Copy link

g11tech commented Apr 3, 2024

i am opposed to the current PR but would prefer some sort of section which can list newer updates and links to it (some meta/info EIP updating the reference)

@SamWilsn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

SamWilsn commented Apr 4, 2024

Thanks for clarifying. Closing this one since the only responses are opposed, but I am open to discuss a more comprehensive policy.

@SamWilsn SamWilsn closed this as completed Apr 4, 2024
@Ivshti
Copy link

Ivshti commented Apr 4, 2024

@g11tech @SamWilsn what do you guys think about re-doing the PR in the following way:

  • no changes to the original text
  • new section under "security considerations" called "Audit report"
  • "Audit report" section contains a link to the PDF and an updated .sol file post-audit, perhaps to a diff between the included reference implementation and the new one
  • @SamWilsn's comment regarding license is resolved

@SamWilsn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

SamWilsn commented Apr 4, 2024

See #291 (comment) for a bit more detail on my reasoning, but the short form is Final means Final, and we only allow updates to correct errors in the specification.

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