Skip to content

BIP 3: Add editor's note clarifying non-binding nature#2117

Closed
lifofifoX wants to merge 1 commit intobitcoin:masterfrom
lifofifoX:bip3-editor-note
Closed

BIP 3: Add editor's note clarifying non-binding nature#2117
lifofifoX wants to merge 1 commit intobitcoin:masterfrom
lifofifoX:bip3-editor-note

Conversation

@lifofifoX
Copy link

@lifofifoX lifofifoX commented Mar 6, 2026

Summary

  • Adds a warning note at the top of BIP 3 from the BIP Editor (Bryan Bishop) clarifying that:
    • BIP 3 is not a policy document and is not binding in any way
    • Editorial decisions remain at the sole discretion of the BIP Editor
    • This document does not create any obligations for the BIP Editor
    • It would be inappropriate to allow an outside process to supplant the editor's own judgment

Source

https://x.com/kanzure/status/2029707460001280383

Add a warning note from the BIP Editor (Bryan Bishop) clarifying that
BIP 3 is not a policy document, is not binding, and does not create
obligations for the BIP Editor. Editorial decisions remain at the
sole discretion of the editor.
@Kruwed
Copy link

Kruwed commented Mar 6, 2026

BIP3 should also mention that paying Bryan Bishop is required - https://x.com/kanzure/status/2029300651633631690

@murchandamus
Copy link
Member

Hi @lifofifoX,

Judging from the conversation the quote originates from, I read this PR as protesting the decision to reject the Ordinals BIP rather than actually proposing to change BIP3.

I’m not sure whether that’s what you are actually looking for, but the Ordinals BIP had not been held up by the document needing more work or whether Ordinals would be adopted by Bitcoin users, but whether the document was to be considered on-topic for this repository. While BIP3 provides a little guidance in that regard, it leaves gray area where judgment calls are necessary. Over several years, no BIP Editor had felt strongly enough one way or the other to either assign a number or reject the proposal. Both had been suggested several times in discussions among BIP Editors in the past few years. While usually decisions regarding number assignment may not have always had unanimous support, both of these got push back. Personally, I could argue for either, but did not feel strongly either way, however, I was dissatisfied with leaving the proposal in limbo.

In the past weeks there was a renewed push for us Editors to make a decision on the proposal. While still neither outcome had unanimous support, people were much more strongly opposed to one outcome. Finally, someone made a decision, which I consider at least an improvement over the situation that the proposal was stuck in limbo indefinitely.

I’m going to close this PR, but please feel free to follow-up, if you feel that it should be reopened or there is more to be discussed here.

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.

3 participants