[bitcoin-dev] Status updates for BIP 9, 68, 112, and 113

[Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev]

Daniel Cousens opened the issue a few weeks ago, that BIP 9 should progress to
Accepted stage. However, as an informational BIP, it is not entirely clear on
whether it falls in the Draft/Accepted/Final classification of proposals
requiring implementation, or the Draft/Active classification like process
BIPs. Background of this discussion is at:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/413
(Discussion on the GitHub BIPs repo is *NOT* recommended, hence bringing this
topic to the mailing list)

Reviewing the criteria for status changes, my opinion is that:
- BIPs 68, 112, 113, and 141 are themselves implementations of BIP 9
-- therefore, BIP 9 falls under the Draft/Accepted/Final class
- BIPs 68, 112, and 113 have been deployed to the network successfully
-- therefore, BIP 9 has satisfied the conditions of not only Accepted status,
but also Final status
-- therefore, BIPs 68, 112, and 113 also ought to be Final status

If there are no objections, I plan to update the status to Final for BIPs 9,
68, 112, and 113 in one month. Since all four BIPs are currently Draft, I also
need at least one author from each BIP to sign-off on promoting them to (and
beyond) Accepted.

BIP 9: Pieter Wuille <***@gmail.com>
Peter Todd <***@petertodd.org>
Greg Maxwell <***@xiph.org>
Rusty Russell <***@rustcorp.com.au>

BIP 68: Mark Friedenbach <***@friedenbach.org>
BtcDrak <***@gmail.com>
Nicolas Dorier <***@gmail.com>
kinoshitajona <***@gmail.com>

BIP 112: BtcDrak <***@gmail.com>
Mark Friedenbach <***@friedenbach.org>
Eric Lombrozo <***@gmail.com>

BIP 113: Thomas Kerin <***@thomaskerin.io>
Mark Friedenbach <***@friedenbach.org>

[Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev]

Post by Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
Daniel Cousens opened the issue a few weeks ago, that BIP 9 should progress to
Accepted stage. However, as an informational BIP, it is not entirely clear on
whether it falls in the Draft/Accepted/Final classification of proposals
requiring implementation, or the Draft/Active classification like process
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/413
(Discussion on the GitHub BIPs repo is *NOT* recommended, hence bringing this
topic to the mailing list)

As of writing the text of BIP68 says:

'This BIP is to be deployed by "versionbits" BIP9 using bit 0.'

Essentially including BIP9 as part of the BIP68 standard; BIP68 could have
equally been written by including some or all of the text of BIP9. If it had
done that, that text would be part of a "Standard BIP" rather than
"Informational BIP", thus I'll argue that BIP9 should also be a "Standard BIP"

Also, note that if we ever modified BIP9, we'd most likely do so with a new
BIP, and in soft-forks using that new standard, would refer to the new BIP #.

Post by Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
- BIPs 68, 112, 113, and 141 are themselves implementations of BIP 9
-- therefore, BIP 9 falls under the Draft/Accepted/Final class
- BIPs 68, 112, and 113 have been deployed to the network successfully
-- therefore, BIP 9 has satisfied the conditions of not only Accepted status,
but also Final status
-- therefore, BIPs 68, 112, and 113 also ought to be Final status
If there are no objections, I plan to update the status to Final for BIPs 9,
68, 112, and 113 in one month. Since all four BIPs are currently Draft, I also
need at least one author from each BIP to sign-off on promoting them to (and
beyond) Accepted.

ACK "Final" status.