đ
Original date posted:2015-09-03
đ Original message:None that I can see.
In fact I was just about to ask for some details about this part of the
process, so this come just at the right time.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> The process in BIP01 was written when we used a different solution for
> storing and presenting BIPs.
>
> I'm thinking of suggesting that the number request process be changed
> to opening a pull req with BIP text with no number (e.g. just using
> the authors name and an index as the number) as the mechenism to
> request number assignment.
>
> Is there any reason that anyone would find this objectionable?
>
> (Please do not respond to this message with anything but a strictly
> directed answer to that question, start a new thread for a different
> subject. Thanks!)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--
Try the Online TrID File Identifier
http://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150904/ba32510a/attachment.html>;
Marco Pontello [ARCHIVE] /
npub12sâŚwdn3h
2023-06-07 17:39:29
in reply to nevent1qâŚqw55
Author Public Key
npub12srjs7mc5grqhm86mngax037h3v75wvx8tpd55cfhmkj6dagqxrqmwdn3hSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 17:39:29Event JSON
{
"id": "6f645c8a8ee645017e3d242a675c59814be994b8a91938dd0421c05a25f548d9",
"pubkey": "5407287b78a2060becfadcd1d33e3ebc59ea39863ac2da5309beed2d37a80186",
"created_at": 1686159569,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ea8805956a408611038cfb546cd825ed67687e725ae27aee85fb4c16b69a4b16",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"297e09d7bd58b7ae3833bf9fad7ac0daf28dfc7db8e9879c9ad3784a9a9ef4c1",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"fdf31024ca0537ed828d895ddc8525f8af023f0dc935a8327a8a496d0d7a9f83"
]
],
"content": "đ
Original date posted:2015-09-03\nđ Original message:None that I can see.\nIn fact I was just about to ask for some details about this part of the\nprocess, so this come just at the right time.\n\nOn Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e The process in BIP01 was written when we used a different solution for\n\u003e storing and presenting BIPs.\n\u003e\n\u003e I'm thinking of suggesting that the number request process be changed\n\u003e to opening a pull req with BIP text with no number (e.g. just using\n\u003e the authors name and an index as the number) as the mechenism to\n\u003e request number assignment.\n\u003e\n\u003e Is there any reason that anyone would find this objectionable?\n\u003e\n\u003e (Please do not respond to this message with anything but a strictly\n\u003e directed answer to that question, start a new thread for a different\n\u003e subject. Thanks!)\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\n\n\n-- \nTry the Online TrID File Identifier\nhttp://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150904/ba32510a/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "665f11a764605ad98a18449b79aea922abba5811bb8784b0109fc917ea63351dfa8c39f562b3e2381a079e6aaf4c1b3e3caa2703b517d640ee2409eef121bb97"
}