Meeting summary (AI Generated)
Quick recap
The EIP Editing Office Hour meeting focused on reviewing various pull requests (PRs) from the Ethereum PM repository, with Gajinder and Pooja discussing the status and approval of several proposals. They debated the placement of “living” and “final” designations in EIP citations, with Gajinder advocating for explicit labeling to provide clear signals to users. The team also addressed website updates, CI issues, and the appropriate categorization of certain EIPs as meta or standard track. They concluded by discussing the need for improved tooling to streamline the PR review process and increase efficiency in handling EIP edits.
Next steps
- Pooja: Create a call for input for PR 11198 regarding the citation status change.
- Gajinder: Reopen the relevant PR that was closed by mistake (related to citation status) and wait for the end of the call for input before making a decision.
- Pooja: Create a call for input to decide on the final/living status for Pooja’s EIP (related to nomenclature process).
- Pooja: Fix the CI issue in Pooja’s EIP by updating the link format (replacing dash with star).
- Gajinder: Approve BPO3 once BPO2 is merged.
- Pooja: Travel to Denver and discuss with teams (e.g., dAI team) about tooling to speed up the EIP editing process.
- Pooja: Add the agenda for the next EIP Editing Office Hour in the Ethereum/PM repository.
Summary
EIP PR Review Meeting
The meeting began with Pooja and Gajinder discussing the setup and agenda for the EIP Editing Office Hour meeting. They noted that the meeting would be shorter than usual as many agenda items had already been covered. The meeting was then recorded, and Pooja introduced the focus of the meeting, which was to review PRs from the EIP repo, particularly those that were on draft. Gajinder was thanked for joining the meeting.
EIP Status Tag Placement Discussion
Gajinder and Pooja discussed the placement of status tags for EIP (Ethereum Improvement Proposal) citations. Gajinder preferred having the “living” or “final” status explicitly marked at the bottom of citations to provide a clear signal, rather than including all possible statuses. Pooja agreed with this approach but raised concerns about editor buy-in, leading Gajinder to recommend opening a formal call for input to gather broader support. Pooja committed to creating a call for input for PR 11198 to decide on this change.
Website Updates and Bug Fixes
Gajinder and Pooja discussed several website updates, including a bug fix for withdrawal reasons and a call for input that needed to be closed. Gajinder agreed to review and approve the website update, and they decided to wait for the end of the call for input before making a final decision on another issue. The authors had made updates to PR 9374, which was noted as being in good standing.
PR Review and CI Issues
Pooja and Gajinder discussed ongoing issues with a PR that has CI problems and unaddressed additional lines. They agreed to allow the PR to remain under review for further editor scrutiny, noting that they conduct reviews weekly. Gajinder expressed concern about accepting large files and emphasized the importance of reviewing changes made by EIP. Both acknowledged that the PR requires more work, including addressing unresolved comments and errors.
Blockchain Witness EIP Discussion
Gajinder and Pooja discussed an EIP related to adding witnesses in the blockchain, awaiting a response from Leon Africa about whether it should be an EIP or a contract. Gajinder mentioned consulting Guillaume about the stateless initiative and will review the PR based on his input. Pooja suggested involving experts alongside editors for editorial and formatting issues and referenced other EIPs for context.
EIP Status and CI Issues
Pooja and Gajinder discussed the status of an EIP, with Gajinder advocating for a “living” status to minimize EIPs on processes, while Pooja expressed uncertainty about other editors’ agreement. They agreed to create a call for input to determine the final status when moving from draft to another status. Additionally, they addressed CI failures, with Pooja agreeing to investigate the issue and fix a formatting error cited for the execution specs.
Ethereum Meta Upgrade Classification Discussion
Pooja and Gajinder discussed the classification of Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs) as “meta” upgrades. Pooja explained that these upgrades involve changing multiple parameters and are similar to historical hard fork upgrades, which is why they are labeled as “meta” EIPs. Gajinder suggested that these upgrades should be classified as standard parameter changes rather than “meta” upgrades. They referenced the Ethereum Magician Fellowship page for further context on upgrade nomenclature.
Pull Request Review and Updates
Gajinder and Pooja reviewed several pull requests, with Gajinder approving BPO3 after its merge with BPO2 and Pooja addressing the associated to-dos. They discussed sidecar PRs, noting that Toni had added updates and that PR 11288 was awaiting the author’s response following Gajinder’s review. Pooja expressed concern about the value of adding minor typo PRs to the office hours queue, suggesting a need for better selection criteria for future PR reviews.
Automated PR Review System Implementation
The team discussed implementing an automated PR review system to improve EIP editing efficiency and response time. Gajinder proposed using a bot to continuously review PRs against EIP-1 guidelines, with human intervention only when necessary. Pooja agreed and mentioned plans to discuss potential tooling solutions with other teams, including the dAI team, at an upcoming meeting in Denver. The community was reminded to watch for the agenda for the next EIP Editing Office Hour on the Ethereum/PM repository.