1. What stakeholder category do you represent?
Community education
2. Which of the proposed EIPs would have a meaningful impact on your community / your work? Please elaborate on why.
We should heavily use Declined for Inclusion for EIPs that don’t significantly move the roadmap forward. (See my feedback on Pectra Retrospective - #2 by abcoathup)
We should also prioritize regular shipping (ideally 2 upgrades per year) to allow fast iteration on the roadmap.
Beyond the headliners of ePBS & BALs the priority is repricing.
Based on Why we should prioritize repricings in Glamsterdam – MariusVanDerWijden recommendation we should do Crucial (7 EIPs in S-tier) and Important (3 in A-tier).
Whilst most repricing EIPs appear to be small changes, that is still 10 EIPs to test, leaving very little scope for additional EIPs.
If client & testing teams have capacity, then we could add 4 EIPs (B-tier):
- EIP-8045 (Exclude slashed validators from proposing) - more of a bug fix
- EIP-7949 (Genesis File Format) - improve testing
- EIP-8062 (Add sweep withdrawal fee for 0x01 validators) & EIP-8068 (Neutral effective balance design) - remove disincentives from consolidation
3. Does anything make any of these EIPs particularly urgent for community / your work?
10 repricing EIPs + 4 potential additional EIPs is already too much, increasing upgrade complexity and risk.
For improved DX I’d like to see increased code size (though EIP-2926 in repricing should make this easier) and avoidance of stack too deep, but we can’t keep adding EIPs, so I didn’t include DX improvements.
4. Do you have any unaddressed concerns about any of the proposed EIPs?
There isn’t information on implementation effort, testing complexity (yet) or readiness, which makes it hard to compare EIPs.
Censorship resistance is important and we have a limited window to implement (in case regulatory conditions change), but an estimated additional 2 months to add FOCIL to Glamsterdam likely rules out 2 upgrades in 2026. I’d be more supportive of FOCIL as a headliner in Heka + Bogotá, especially as this gives increased time to improve readiness.
5. Any additional comments?
We need to aid EIP authors with early feedback. Does their EIP significantly move the roadmap forward, is there support from their targeted segment of the community, is there appetite from client teams to implement and what is the testing complexity.
We also need to find mechanisms to capture implementation effort, testing complexity and readiness that can be shared via EIP process/Forkcast.
