Update EIP-1: Adds @xinbenlv as an EIP Editor

[Pandapip1]

CC'ing all editors: @lightclient,@axic,@gcolvin,@SamWilsn,@Pandapip1

[eth-bot]

A critical exception has occurred:
Message: pr 5502 is already merged; quitting
(cc @alita-moore, @mryalamanchi)

[xinbenlv]

Thanks for the invitation @Pandapip1 .
I love to contribute to this group and am honored to be invited. I humbly accept the invitation if you and other editors also think my editorial contributions has been helpful than harmful.

Side note: your encouragement means a lot to me. I particularly admire this invitation from you because you and I usually hold very orthogonal views.

[xinbenlv]

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

(fail) .github/workflows/auto-review-bot.yml

classification
ambiguous

• '.github/workflows/auto-review-bot.yml' must be in eip-###.md format; this error will be overwritten upon relevant editor approval

It seems the eip-bot says it has to be eip-###.md format, is this intended? @Pandapip1

[poojaranjan]

Having a good number of EIP Editors to review proposals to bring the number of open pull requests under 10 is a dream that I hope will become true one day.

This PR was brought up in EIPIP meeting 63, but we didn't get enough time to discuss. Though, this will be a decision of present EIP editors, I just want to share info documented in EIP editor “apprentice” handbook which is a collection of summary of decisions of past EIPIP meetings.

As per How can an apprentice make a request to be formally onboarded as an EIP editior?, it appears to me that "tenure of active contribution" is an important criteria of consideration along with approval of present EIP Editors.

"The contribution of an apprentice will be monitored by all EIP editors during the internship period. After 6 months of reviewing the pull requests as apprentice, when the contributor feels comfortable enough with the process and would like to be added to the repository as an EIP editor, a pull request with request to be listed as EIP editor has to be made."

IMHO, EIP Editor is a responsible position and building community trust will be helpful with contributions made over a period of time.

I see the mention of "internship duration" or "active contribution tenure" is missing in EIP-5069: EIP Editor Handbook. Probably it can be updated, if we consider engagement time as a valid consideration.

[Pandapip1]

engagement time as a valid consideration

@xinbenlv has been engaged for at least the past month. That's close to (if not quite) how long I was engaged before I became an editor.

[xinbenlv]

Thanks for the support @Pandapip1.

If it helps, my reviews can be found as: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pulls?q=+reviewed-by%3AXinbenlv

[Pandapip1]

If it helps, my reviews can be found as: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pulls?q=+reviewed-by%3AXinbenlv

That will definitely be helpful!

[lightclient]

I would personally like to see a longer history of consistent contributions, before adding as an editor.

[Pandapip1]

I would personally like to see a longer history of consistent contributions, before adding as an editor.

Fair enough. I'll leave this open for now. @xinbenlv, just keep doing what you're doing for now.

[SamWilsn]

Greg and myself were on today's EIPIP call, and were in favour. Panda previously expressed a positive sentiment. I believe we now have sufficient evidence that @xinbenlv will be a solid contributor.