I am strongly opposed to EIPIP meetings being rebranded as ACDG.
ACDG to me implies a much wider remit than EIPIP has had and should be driven by All Core Devs (either ACD(E/C/T) moderators or EF Protocol Support). See: AllCoreDevs, Network Upgrade & EthMagicians Process Improvements
EIP process
The EIP process should work for all core devs, not the other way around.
It should be quick and easy for EIP authors to get EIPs to draft level and Proposed for Inclusion in a Network Upgrade Meta EIP. It should be easy to review, give feedback and prioritize which EIPs should be Considered for Inclusion.
The EIP process should be completely split from the ERC process, with separate meetings & editors. So that the needs of protocol and application layers can be met via quick iteration and allowed to diverge as needed.
Forkcast (@wolovim) adding an EIP directory rather than via https://eips.ethereum.org suggests that for whatever reason we aren’t able to iterate easily/fast enough via the current system. Other examples of fast iteration for All Core Devs: Protocol Calls - Forkcast, Glamsterdam Upgrade - Forkcast, ACD Planning Sandbox - Forkcast)
It feels like we are missing someone who’s entire focus is on making the EIP process smooth. A dedicated (and funded) EIP coordinator or someone in the EF Protocol Support team who’s main role is the EIP process. (cc @nixo)
ACDG
I am open to an ACDG in some format, assuming it is driven by All Core Devs (either ACD(E/C/T) moderators or EF Protocol Support). Ideally would have some async elements (for those asleep at Eth o’clock).
Some of the current challenges I see (some were covered in 2025 upgrade process retrospective - #2 by abcoathup):
- Maintaining a 6 monthly upgrade cadence
- Large number of EIPs being Proposed for Inclusion (difficult to review the volume & give feedback) (51 for Glamsterdam)
- How to signal early which EIPs are likely/unlikely (so unlikely EIPs don’t even get proposed for a particular upgrade) (perhaps via Fork Focus & one off working groups/office hours)
- How to signal which EIPs are worth prototyping (and when) (perhaps some one off working groups/office hours)
- How to feedback, so that authors/champions update EIPs (if required) and repropose for future but don’t get burnt out from having to propose every 6 months, or spending effort on EIPs that will never get included.
- Large number of EIPs being Considered for Inclusion (14 so far for Glamsterdam)
- How to handle mid size EIPs (may not be important enough to be a headliner and too complex to be a small EIP)