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

EIP-1679: Add EIP-1344 as proposed to Istanbul #1937

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 24, 2019

Conversation

fubuloubu
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes: #1935

@eip-automerger
Copy link

Hi! I'm a bot, and I wanted to automerge your PR, but couldn't because of the following issue(s):

  • EIP 1679 requires approval from one of (@5chdn, @axic)

@bmann
Copy link
Contributor

bmann commented Apr 23, 2019

Changes got merged in, so you could potentially be the first one to propose @fubuloubu

@axic
Copy link
Member

axic commented Apr 23, 2019

This needs to be rebased though.

@fubuloubu
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hold on, there's something weird with an additional file that doesn't show up in my local branch...

@fubuloubu
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay, fixed it!

@eip-automerger eip-automerger merged commit 7833176 into ethereum:master Apr 24, 2019
@fubuloubu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@axic @bmann what is the next step for this process? Is there an ACD/other call scheduled that this proposed will be discussed for inclusion into Istanbul?

@fubuloubu fubuloubu deleted the patch-2 branch April 24, 2019 14:11
@bmann
Copy link
Contributor

bmann commented Apr 24, 2019

@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.

@fubuloubu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@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.

@bmann
Copy link
Contributor

bmann commented Apr 25, 2019

Let’s do this here https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/process-of-getting-eips-getting-accepted-into-a-hardfork/3191

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Consider EIP1344 for the next upgrade (Meta: EIP1679)
4 participants