-
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
Update EIP-7723: Add "Declined for Inclusion" #9056
Conversation
✅ All reviewers have approved. |
EIPS/eip-7723.md
Outdated
### Context: Upgrade Meta EIPs | ||
|
||
When planning a network upgrade, anyone **MAY** draft an Upgrade Meta EIP to list EIPs in various stages of consideration. This Meta EIP **SHOULD** include three categories in its specification section: `Proposed for Inclusion`, `Considered for Inclusion` and `Scheduled for Inclusion`. Even if a category is empty, it **SHOULD** be included in the initial draft for clarity. | ||
When planning a network upgrade, anyone **MAY** draft an Upgrade Meta EIP to list EIPs in various stages of consideration. This Meta EIP **SHOULD** include four categories in its specification section: `Proposed for Inclusion`, `Rejected for Inclusion`, `Considered for Inclusion` and `Scheduled for Inclusion`. Even if a category is empty, it **SHOULD** be included in the initial draft for clarity. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When planning a network upgrade, anyone **MAY** draft an Upgrade Meta EIP to list EIPs in various stages of consideration. This Meta EIP **SHOULD** include four categories in its specification section: `Proposed for Inclusion`, `Rejected for Inclusion`, `Considered for Inclusion` and `Scheduled for Inclusion`. Even if a category is empty, it **SHOULD** be included in the initial draft for clarity. | |
When planning a network upgrade, anyone **MAY** draft an Upgrade Meta EIP to list EIPs in various stages of consideration. This Meta EIP **SHOULD** include four categories in its specification section: `Proposed for Inclusion`, `Declined for Inclusion`, `Considered for Inclusion` and `Scheduled for Inclusion`. Even if a category is empty, it **SHOULD** be included in the initial draft for clarity. |
EIPS/eip-7723.md
Outdated
|
||
When the Upgrade Meta EIP is moved to `Last Call`, the `Proposed for Inclusion` and `Considered for Inclusion` lists **SHOULD** be removed, leaving only `Scheduled for Inclusion`. | ||
When the Upgrade Meta EIP is moved to `Last Call`, the `Proposed for Inclusion`, `Rejected for Inclusion` and `Considered for Inclusion` lists **SHOULD** be removed, leaving only `Scheduled for Inclusion`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When the Upgrade Meta EIP is moved to `Last Call`, the `Proposed for Inclusion`, `Rejected for Inclusion` and `Considered for Inclusion` lists **SHOULD** be removed, leaving only `Scheduled for Inclusion`. | |
When the Upgrade Meta EIP is moved to `Last Call`, the `Proposed for Inclusion`, `Declined for Inclusion` and `Considered for Inclusion` lists **SHOULD** be removed, leaving only `Scheduled for Inclusion`. |
Co-authored-by: Andrew B Coathup <28278242+abcoathup@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew B Coathup <28278242+abcoathup@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew B Coathup <28278242+abcoathup@users.noreply.github.com>
Thanks for the review, @abcoathup ! |
@timbeiko we still need to amend the Scheduled for Inclusion, Included & Rationale sections to include DFI. |
Co-authored-by: Andrew B Coathup <28278242+abcoathup@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All Reviewers Have Approved; Performing Automatic Merge...
Introduces
Declined for Inclusion
after conversations at the L1 R&D workshop at Devcon. The purpose of this status is to signal that core devs with to explicitly exclude an EIP from a network upgrade and no longer discuss it as part of that upgrade's planning process. This already happens implicitly, where anything that isn'tCFI
'd orSFI
'd is considered rejected from the upgrade. TheDFI
label makes this more explicit.This does not imply the EIP is "rejected forever": a DFI'd EIP can be proposed again for the next network upgrade.