-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
EIP-1679: Add EIP-1344 as proposed to Istanbul #1937
Conversation
Changes got merged in, so you could potentially be the first one to propose @fubuloubu |
This needs to be rebased though. |
Hold on, there's something weird with an additional file that doesn't show up in my local branch... |
Okay, fixed it! |
@fubuloubu you need to put on agenda for ACD if you want it approved. Go ahead and move forward with implementation and discussion now. Also, I am assuming you are the “champion” for this EIP? It’s a new term @axic came up with and we might amend EIP233 to include it. Means you are point of contact and are actively working on / PMing to get this in. |
@rmeissner and myself are both involved, but I suppose as the loudest mouth I am acting as "champion" for this proposal. I am certainly happy to fill that role. It was discussed on ethereum/pm#93 (comment) already, but I am unsure if that met the requirements of discussion for consideration into Istanbul. In any case, I don't think it's very clear when ACD discussion is required, or if something is successful coming out of the discussion. I would appreciate your guidance here. For implementation, I have a branch for py-evm/trinity implemented here. Do I need to create implementations for geth/parity? Do I need to create a test case in the https://github.com/ethereum/tests repo? What are the requirements for acceptance into the hard fork EIP? EIP-233 only says that "[o]nce the EIP has been accepted by Core Devs, the EIP should be moved to the Accepted EIPs section", which isn't terribly descriptive. |
Fixes: #1935