-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.4k
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
Errata'd EIPs #5652
Comments
If we decide the changes are errata, we can change a final EIP (and git keeps the history.) If we decide it isn't errata, it's a new EIP and I think it deserves its own number. I'm also concerned that complicating the EIP number namespace will just make things worse. |
The point here is that you might have something like EIP-712 where there are valid arguments for and against "it's an errata" vs "it's actually a major change." Skipping the discussion and letting the authors make that judgment call saves EIP editor brain bandwidth. |
I love the idea. There will always be a chance for small formal errors in EIPs as we're all humans after all and EIP numbers are already being recognized in the heads of the people. Due to this a sudden change of the number for a new version of a well known standard might be damaging the communication. |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
Dismissing stale bot. |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
Dismissing stale bot. |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
Dismissing stale bot. |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
Dismissing stale bot. |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
Dismissing stale bot |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
Dismissing stale bot |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
Bump. |
There has been no activity on this issue for 1 week. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. |
This issue was closed due to inactivity. If you are still pursuing it, feel free to reopen it and respond to any feedback. |
Proposed Change
I propose that with the approval of an original non-errata'd Final EIP's author, a new EIP can be created with the EIP "number"
<original-eip-number>-e<number-erratas>
, where<original-eip-number>
is the original Final EIP's number, and<number-erratas>
is a number that starts at1
and increments by 1 every time an errata EIP for the given original EIP number reaches final, withdrawn, or stagnant.So, instead of modifying EIP-721, a new EIP would be created with the number
721-e1
, referenced as "EIP-721-e1".The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: