Before we dive into the EIPs for Instanbul, I suggest we try to address some issues with how we deal with the proposed changes, and what are our priorities.
I proposed to look at these things:
- Introduce higher standards for EIPs - they require Proof Of Concept implementation + pre-generated test cases (so that that testing is not an afterthought as usual)
- Revisit the assumption that we need to bundle a lot of updates into one big release instead of making smaller releases more frequently. I heard before on this call that coordination costs are too high to afford smaller releases - but are they really?
- Appoint dedicated reviewers (not necessary from the people who are regularly attending the call) for changes rather than wait for someone on the call to look into the changes
- Do we need to create a deluge of EIPs for Istanbul now or do we spend some time on discussing what the most important changes are?
I strongly support this initiative, and I see value in all of these ideas, especially #1. The way Alexey phrased it on the call is, if we follow these steps, we don’t need to hold everyone (all the core devs) hostage to each individual EIP for months.
A few more questions I have:
- What do other folks think?
- What’s missing here? What else can/should be included/improved?
- How do we appoint reviewers for EIPs? How does this fit into the existing EIP editor process (or not), and what pool are these reviewers drawn from? How do we determine which EIPs are worthy of being reviewed?
- What does this (especially #1, requiring a POC implementation) mean for less technical EIPs?