EIP-1: Stronger rules for discussion-url

[axic]

This is sparked by EIP-1046 and EIP-1047 linking to reddit threads:

• https://www.reddit.com/r/raredigitalart/comments/8hfh1g/erc20_metadata_extension_eip_1046/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/raredigitalart/comments/8hfk2a/token_metadata_json_schema_eip_1047/

Both of those now display this:

That means their discussion urls are read-only, which defeats the purpose.

---

I do not have a clear proposal here, but only a conversation starter. Likely allowing the following makes the most sense based on past experience:

• https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/*
• https://ethereum-magicians.org/*
• https://ethresear.ch/*

The other currently used URLs are:

• reddit (as above)
• t.me (telegram)
• https://discuss.ens.domains/t/new-standard-proposal-ens-multicoin-support/1148
• https://gitter.im/ethereum/topics/topic/5ac4d974109bb043328911ce/eip-969-discussion
• https://gitter.im/ethereum/EIPs
• https://gitter.im/ethereum/AllCoreDevs
• and countless cases of github.com/<username>/issues/<n>

We already disallow https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/* (as an archaic decision), we could perhaps just disallow reddit as well?

Probably we need to ask the question here: what is the goal of the discussion url? Is it for ephemeral discussions only? Is it something which is important after something becomes Final? If so, should it be removed after it became Final?

[MicahZoltu]

Probably we need to ask the question here: what is the goal of the discussion url?

I have wondered this myself on many occasions. I would support a change that makes the discussion URL go away at final. This would be similar to RFCs where the final RFC doesn't include a link to historical discussions. If people really wanted to find the historical discussion, they can dig through git history so it isn't like we are purging it from the internet.

This policy would also, importantly, let us eventually close GitHub issue discussions so we don't have an ever growing list of open issues.

[lightclient]

I am in favor of this also. However, my preference would be to disallow ethresear.ch topics.

[BrentAllsop]

@axic and @MicahZoltu were asking: “what is the goal of the discussion url?”

This should be obvious, and is already partially stated in EIP 1: “The EIP author is responsible for building consensus within the community and documenting dissenting opinions.”
It is more concise to simply state: “It is to build and track consensus.” And the author is not the only one who should be working on this goal.
People need to be able to indicate when they are finally “on board” with any definitive (all current supporters agree with as it improves) and constantly improving to get more people on board proposal.
And asking anyone to “dig through git history” of any open discussion to do any of the above, does not work, and just leads to more polarization and belief that nobody agrees on anything, since nobody ever talks about what they agree on in an open discussion.
Needs to have some kind of structure where people can “focus on what they agree on” pushing lessor important issues out of the way of consensus, into lower-level discussions.

FYI all this and so much more can be rigorously done with the canonizer.com dynamic petition system.

[MicahZoltu]

Consensus building is separate from the EIP process (it is part of the hard fork coordination process), so I don't think that alone is a good reason to keep the discussions-to URL around, especially after the EIP is final.

[BrentAllsop]

@MicahZoltu So you are saying the current statement "The EIP author is responsible for building consensus withing the community and document dissenting opinions" isn't relevant to the EIP process?
I guess I need to learn more about the hard fork coordination process.

[poojaranjan]

IMO, Fellowship of Ethereum Magicians is one of the best places for discussing any proposal. I suppose this is already a recommendation and in one of the EIPIP meetings, the group agreed to make it more than a recommendation and push it as a good practice for future proposals.

I have been suggesting authors (of new proposals) to create a doscussion thread at FEM in PEEPanEIP.

[gcolvin]

The Magician's is highly encouraged, but I think authors should be able to point anywhere they like that is publicly accessible. If the URL goes dead it is the author's problem, as champion. The EIP itself should stand on its own.

[github-actions]

There has been no activity on this issue for two months. It will be closed in a week if no further activity occurs. If you would like to move this EIP forward, please respond to any outstanding feedback or add a comment indicating that you have addressed all required feedback and are ready for a review.

[axic]

Still an unsolved question.

[MicahZoltu]

The effective rule at the moment I believe is that discussions-to url should be https://ethereum-magicians.org/* unless the author is openly opposed to that for some reason, in which case https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/* is allowed but frowned upon. If someone wants to submit a PR to EIP-1/Template to reflect this I suspect it'll go through.

[xinbenlv]

#5340 is a revisit of this question