Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Create bsip-0087.md #265

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Mar 11, 2020
Merged

Create bsip-0087.md #265

merged 11 commits into from
Mar 11, 2020

Conversation

bitcrab
Copy link
Contributor

@bitcrab bitcrab commented Feb 26, 2020

create a new PR for BSIP87 to replace the old messy one.

@abitmore
Copy link
Member

Thanks.

bsip-0087.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bsip-0087.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bsip-0087.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bsip-0087.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bsip-0087.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@bitcrab
Copy link
Contributor Author

bitcrab commented Feb 28, 2020

modified the changed file according to your suggestion, please check again. @sschiessl-bcp @abitmore

add requested change
bsip-0087.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
review update
@sschiessl-bcp
Copy link
Collaborator

sschiessl-bcp commented Mar 6, 2020

@abitmore please advise, I feel the important thing is to keep it compatible to core code and BSIP74, which is already voted up.

1.14.239 | Poll - BSIP74 - Market Fee Ratiobitcrab currently has 464,918,785 votes, and to become active 715,885,028 are needed.

In order to establish 1.14.158 | threshold-bsip as the threshold for BSIPs it would need to either be mentioned in the BSIP-74 specifically, or the better option a BSIP needs to be written establishing a set of rules for when BSIPs become active that include 1.14.158 as the threshold. This new BSIP must then be passed with the old rules (become active by receiving part of the daily pay).

If you do not agree with me there, please elaborate why.

@bitcrab
Copy link
Contributor Author

bitcrab commented Mar 6, 2020

@abitmore please advise, I feel the important thing is to keep it compatible to core code and BSIP74, which is already voted up.

1.14.239 | Poll - BSIP74 - Market Fee Ratiobitcrab currently has 464,918,785 votes, and to become active 715,885,028 are needed.

In order to establish 1.14.158 | threshold-bsip as the threshold for BSIPs it would need to either be mentioned in the BSIP-74 specifically, or the better option a BSIP needs to be written establishing a set of rules for when BSIPs become active that include 1.14.158 as the threshold. This new BSIP must then be passed with the old rules (become active by receiving part of the daily pay).

If you do not agree with me there, please elaborate why.

the poll BSIP worker voting is just to ensure that the community agree to implement it, without considering budget.

1.14.158 is effective for all the BSIPs.

after that, one more voting for budget is needed, one BSIP can be included in a big budget worker or as a separate budget worker to accept approval, either is OK, IIRC we have experienced both.

I hope at this moment we can firstly focus on making the BSIP document ready and then discuss how to vote.

Chinese can build one hospital in 10 days, I don't think it's good to cost more than 10 days to prepare one document.

@sschiessl-bcp
Copy link
Collaborator

sschiessl-bcp commented Mar 6, 2020

Chinese can build one hospital in 10 days, I don't think it's good to cost more than 10 days to prepare one document.

That comparison does not hold since the BitShares Blockchain does not have centralized decision making and/or "unlimited" funds.

the poll BSIP worker voting is just to ensure that the community agree to implement it, without considering budget.

1.14.158 is effective for all the BSIPs.

I understand the intent. 1.14.158 has not been approved as the new BSIP threshold by BTS holders, not for BSIP-74 (since it is not mentioned in there) nor for all BSIPs. It has only been created by committee. Should that be considered enough? And if so, why?

I have opened a new issue for this: #267. Let's stay on topic in this one.

miner modification.
Update Specification
update specification
update specification
@sschiessl-bcp sschiessl-bcp merged commit 8127c5c into bitshares:master Mar 11, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants