# EIP Governance

## 2023-06-19 V/K
- Every can be held up by a single editor
- Ways to submit IETF draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/
- Victor shares the idea of using DNS for resolving to blockchain address:
- Kyle consider "well-known":
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5785
- Birds of a Feather:
- in person gather feedback

## 2023-04-24 AllERCDevs Call (-1th)
xinbenlv@, kdenhartog@,

Updates
1. xinbenlv@: call a regular AllERCDevs Call.

2. kdenhartog@:
- consider next step is to put up a proposal
- thoughts suggestion: keep relationships building.

3. having a call for AllERCDevs.
4. "W3C Community Group"

Proposed

Vote multiple below

- Slot1a Tue UTC2200-2259
- Slot1b Tue UTC2300-2359
- Slot2a Thu UTC1500-1559
- Slot2b Thu UTC1600-1659

## Observation: the current state

### Power of Merge
- Currently only EIP Editors can approve a bot merge.
- When a "manual" merge is needed, only @SamWilsn and @lightclient or @axic has the power to merge.

### The Meta Power: Adding Editor / Set Bot Rule ...
- These powers are all vested in the "github merge power".

### Walidator enforcement of EIP-1
- Walidator bot becomes the enforcement mechanism of EIP-1. Ideally it should match EIP-1, but when left to interpretation the bot's implementation has been given final say.

### Editor Consensus
- In order to update the process defined in EIP-1 editors need to achieve consensus

### The problem
#### Lack of Defined Process of Consesnsus

The lack of process around how consensus is achieved and a final decision is made is coupled to the managerial task of actually merging the EIP. Lack of editor consensus leads to lack of progress currently.

- An incidence when EIP Editors can't form consensus: [the issuance of EIP number 5000](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/5270)

#### Lack of Editor Capacity, partly because of lacking clear pathway towards editorship/

#### The Call for Forking ERCs/EIPs

#### Too many responsibilities fall on editors currently
- This leads to a lack of checks and balances and a small group of beneveloent dictators

#### Lack of ability to broadcast active discussions and EIP in a coordinated way
- Today most discussions are split across FEM, Github, Discord, and Twitter. FEM is the closest to a solution for a common play to coordinate discussions, but doesn't always attract sufficient quorum to make decisions.

## Possible Solutions / future state
- W3C process: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19990509
- IETF informal process: https://www.ietf.org/standards/process/informal/

### How W3C works
1. Example: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model
2. their process allow forming a working group.
3. "low bar" for setting up a "community group" for draft.
4. https://github.com/w3c-ccg/
5. https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/
6. Community Group publishes a pre-Draft and call for "chartering"
7. The W3C members can vote on whether they want to "charter a working group"
https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/proposal-forking-ercs-from-eips-repository/12804/8?u=kdenhartog

### Action Item
- [ ] Consider building a mechanism to "push" communicataion to subscribers, e.g. EIP Authors / Peer Reviewers / Working Groups ... or Rely on FEM/Discourse Email Notification
- [X] Knowledge sharing for showing how IETF/W3C groups work
- [X] Kyle to give a presentation
- [X] Xinbenlv/Victor to schedule a "venue" or "time"

## Who
- Who should be involved?
- [] EIP Editors
- Pandapip1@
- Samwilsn@
- xinbenlv@
- lightclient@
- axic@
- g11tech@
- gcolvin@
- vitalik@
- [] ECH/EthMagic
- timbecko@
- pooja
- jpitts@
- Authors
- EIP-2718 Micah Zoltu
- ERC-20 Fabian Vogelsteller (frozman@)
- ERC-137 Nick Johnson (archanid@)
- ERC-721 Williamm Entriken
- ERC-/Diamonds NicK Mudge
- https://github.com/ethereum/execution-specs
- gurukamath@
- petertdavies@
- ligi@
- MariusVanDerWijden@
- Core Clients
- Geth
- Nethermind
- Erigon
- Besu
- ERC Adoptions / Wallet / dApps
- MetaMask: danfinlay@
- Ethers.js: ricmoo@
- OpenZeppelin: frangio@
- Uniswap:
- MakerDAO:
- OpenSea: Cory Hardman ([e-mail])
- Coinbase:
- Infura?
- L2 Networks
- Optimism
- Starkware
- Arbitrum
- etc
- Who are stakeholders?
- Whose consensus do we need for this ERC/EIP groups

## References
- https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/how-do-we-address-editors-being-overworked-with-a-better-governance-method-and-what-does-it-look-like/12065/16
- https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/discussion-of-criteria-for-advancing-eip-status-a-straw-man-proposal/11995/8?u=kdenhartog