►
From YouTube: EIPIP Meeting 90
Description
Agenda: https://github.com/ethereum-cat-herders/EIPIP/issues/271
A
Welcome
to
eipip
meeting
90..
This
is
issue
number
271
on
eipip
GitHub
repository
I
have
shared
agenda
in
chat.
We
have
pretty
light
agenda
for
today
we
have
discussed
open
issues,
full
requests,
discussion,
continued
and
updates
from
the
past
meeting
monthly
Insight
a
little
bit
about
EIP
editing
office
hour.
A
So
starting
from
the
very
first
item,
I
have
added
a
pull
request
here,
which
is
seven
double
six
five.
It
is
about
website
removing
networking
and
interface
categories.
It
seems
that
there
are
a
lot
of
discussion
on
the
on
this
particular
pull
request
and-
and
we
are
still
not
having
a
concrete
decision.
I
would
love
for
someone
to
maybe
summarize
this
and
let
people
know
where
we
are
on.
This
I
also
see
a
another
call
for
input.
A
B
I
can't
summarize
in
depth
why?
But
I
can
give
a
little
overview
so
I
think
it's
because
having
a
network
is
a
separate
category,
doesn't
really
make
that
much
sense
from
like
a
process
perspective.
Networking
changes
will
often
go
through
a
lot
of
the
same
like
decisions,
and
then
they
have
all
the
same
people
as
core
eips,
so
merging
them
with
core
eips
makes
some
sense
and
then
the
interface
category
we
have
kind
of
pushed
it
off
to
the
execution
apis
repository.
B
So
getting
rid
of
the
category
might
encourage
people
to
stop
making
new
ones.
That's
kind
of
my
understanding
but
yeah.
It's
it's
Panda
Pep's
proposal.
So
I
don't
really
want
to
speak
on
his
behalf.
A
Well,
I
think,
historically
speaking,
Korea
is
where
a
part
of
upgrade
and
moving
an
interface
on
networking
to
the
list
of
core
EIP
doesn't
feel
right
to
me
as
as
an
individual,
so
I'll
be
more
in
favor
of
like
letting
it
live
where
it
is,
but
there
should
not
be
any
further
new
proposal.
We
can
just
replicate
that
category.
C
A
A
B
So
I'm,
not
in
favor
of
doing
anything
until
we
figure
out
like
the
ERC,
EIP
split
and
whatever
we
end
up
doing
with
with
working
groups,
I
I
do
think.
Putting
networking
and
Decor
makes
some
amount
of
sense.
Just
because,
like
the
way,
I
kind
of
envisioned
core
is
anything
that
can
cause
main
net
to
Fork.
So
if
you,
if
you
implement
networking
differently
enough,
you'll
end
up
forking,
if
you
implement,
like
the
evm
differently,
you'll
end
up
forking.
D
I'm,
more
or
less
I
agree
with
Sam
and
Lakeland
over
here.
Basically,
we
can
leave
it
untouched
for
now,
and
my
opinion
is
maybe
over
the
time
we
can
see
more
of
them
as
tags
rather
than
categories
basically
have
fuzzy
kind
of
a
thing
where
you
can
tag
like
you
can
have
multiple
tags
on
an
EIP
and
sort
of
you
know,
mix,
have
sort
of
say
that
this
has
impact
on
these
X
number
of
areas.
C
C
B
Yeah
I
think
breaking
links
is
we're
not
going
to
break
links?
Well,
we
can
make
that
a
rule
but
like
if
there's
a
like,
if
we
change
the
rendering
system
so
that
it
it
uses
tags
for
example,
then
I
think
it
makes
sense
to
update
everything
that
way.
We
don't
have
to
maintain
two
different
rendering
systems,
but
that's
a
discussion
for
when
we
update
the
rendering
system
so.
E
Oh
I'm,
muted,
instead
of
unmuted
I
I
I'm
still
way
too
hammered
by
this
move
to
have
been
thinking
about
any
of
it.
Unfortunately,
but
I
I
would
tend
to
think
that
the
networking
stuff
really
is
core
stuff,
even
though
it
isn't
directly
part
of
the
protocol.
E
If
it's
important
at
all,
it
generally
has
to
do
with
networking
with
I'm
sorry
I'm
not
coherent.
Today,.
C
I
mean
I:
don't
disagree
with
people
that
networking
is
very
core
thing,
but
we
just
don't
use
eaps
for
Network
anymore,
so
it's
not
really
a
debate
about.
Will
we
in
the
future
have
more
eips
in
this
networking
category?
Should
future
eips
related
to
networking,
B
and
core
be
in
networking
be
in
a
core
tag
with
networking
like
we're?
Just
we
don't
have
networking
IPS.
So
it's
a
question
about
what
to
do
with
old
eips
that
are
networking
category.
A
So
if
we
try
to
like
split
it
into
topics,
there
are
two
topics
of
discussion
number
one:
what
to
do
with
the
older
EIP
and
it
seems
like
most
of
the
people
on
the
call
they
are
okay
to
let
it
live
the
way
it
was
living.
And
the
next
question
is
like:
should
we
have
any
further
networking
or
interface
VIPs
in
future?
And
if
we
do,
we
might
need
a
working
group.
It
seems
like
we
may
not
need.
C
Yeah
I
mean
I,
think
that's
something
that
we
can
figure
out
in
the
future.
I
think
we
should
focus
on
coming
up
with
the
working
group
for
core
changes,
as
we
Define
core
to
be
today
and
if,
at
some
point
in
the
future
people
desire
to
write
eips
related
to
networking,
then
we
can
cross
the
bridge.
But
I
don't
want
to
try-
and
you
know
figure
this
out
ahead
of
time
before
we
really
know
what
people
want.
A
That
makes
sense,
and
hopefully
this
is
the
right
time
to
maybe
even
Define
core
and
based
on
the
definition
of
core.
Maybe
we
can
have
people
for
co-working
grow
and
yeah.
A
Perfect,
so
if
we
have
to
move
on
from
here,
I'm
trying
to
just
move
on
from
the
first
item
that
was
PR
number
765
seems
like
we
want
to
leave
where
we
are
and
moving
from
here.
If
we
have
to
Define
that
the
different
categories
like
the
core
and
the
ERC
I
believe
will
be
the
two
major
categories
for
which
we
might
need
a
working
group.
A
A
B
Yeah
I
think
that
that
generally
makes
sense,
I'm
I'm,
still
kind
of
fleshing
out
some
of
the
details
on
working
groups,
but
that's
kind
of
what
they
look.
It's
just
like.
You
have
just
working
groups,
a
core
working
group
like
in
eip's
like
meta
governance,
working
group
and
then
that's
it.
That's
pretty
much
all
the
categorization.
We
have.
A
The
reason
for
the
proposal
is
like
I,
really
do
not
see
a
relevance
of
all
these,
like
you
know,
proposals
being
a
part
of
the
standard
track
type,
so
they
can
live
independently
and
I.
Think
that
would
be
easier
for
communication
purposes
as
well.
A
Okay,
anything
more
on
this
item
before
we
move
on.
B
Point
point
of
order:
we
can't
close
it
until
we
get
input
from
exec.
C
A
E
B
It's
like
every
editor
is
entitled
to
their
opinion,
so
everybody
gets
to
say
you
know
what
they
think
if
they
don't
answer
within
30
days
from
the
call
for
input,
then
whatever
the
consensus
is
at
the
30
days
from
the
call
for
input
is
the
decision,
so
it
isn't
a
vote,
it's
still
rough
consensus
and
each
decision
is
is
limited
to
30
days
at
most.
D
B
Yeah,
so
it's
like
so
here
we're
going
to
be,
we
are
electing
somebody
as
keeper
of
consensus,
which
is
kind
of
like
you
know,
just
a
person
who
determines
what
the
rough
consensus
is
and
when
it's
been
reached,
then
yeah.
That's
what
if
that
person
says,
there's
a
consensus
that's
been
reached,
then
the
decision
has
been
made
as
long
as
everybody
has.
The
opportunity
to
you
know,
give
their
input.
A
A
Sounds
good
all
right,
I
think
we
should
perhaps
wait
till
deadline
of
the
discussion
item
and
we'll
bring
it
after.
A
All
right,
let's
move
on
to
item
number
two,
which
is
a
discussion
continued
or
updates
from
past
meeting,
so
I
see
EAP
5069
that
has
incorporated
Charter
staff
and
it
is
added
as
meta.
A
It
explains
what
are
the
mission
structure,
membership
decision
making
process
everything
else,
I
wonder
if
there
are
any
further
things
that
we
would
like
to
communicate
or
do
we
need
to
update
it
any
further.
A
Very
well
so
that's
there.
There
are
people
coming
up
on
this
card
for
questions
around
what
EIP
editors
can
or
cannot
do
for
those
people
I
highly
recommend
following
EAP
5069.
That
explains
what
is
expected
by
them
and
what
authors
should
be
performing
on
their
own
foreign.
A
Okay,
next
one
is
from
the
past
meeting,
so
the
item
for
discussion
was
considered.
Adopting
a
community
specification
license
term
for
the
new
ERC
Depot
and
we
were
expecting
some
updates
from
I
suppose
it
was
from
Victor
and
I.
Believe
Vector
is
not
on
the
call
today,
but
he
draw
some
comment
here
on
the
diff
card.
It
suggests
that
copyright
license
for
ERC
left,
Depot
thinking
of
pc0,
plus
Apache
2.0
dual
license
and
that's
what
it's
from
his
side.
Anyone
else
has
any
other
information
to
add
here.
A
A
Yes,
yes,
I
think
in
the
last
meeting
EAP
editing
office
hour,
we
came
across
a
new
something
new
I
may
have
been
missing,
never
mind.
A
All
right,
so
that's
the
only
update
shared
by
Victor
and
yeah.
We
can
move
on
to
the
next
one.
Next
one
was
updating,
EAP,
721,
I.
Suppose
the
decision
made
on
the
last
call
was.
If
there
is
no
objection,
we
can
merge
The
Proposal
after
two
weeks
and
it's
more
than
two
weeks
so
I
was
just
wondering
if
it
is
good
to
merge.
The
pr
number
is
7550.
A
Okay,
cool
so
we'll
Market
that
and
yeah.
Whenever
you
get
a
chance,
please
merge
that
the
next
one
is
EIP
ERC,
GitHub
repositories,
so
I
see
proposal,
7329,
ERC,
EIP,
repository
split,
a
meta
proposal
by
Matt
and
Deno
is
now
is
in
the
final
status.
A
I
wanted
to
bring
it
to
the
agenda,
to
maybe
figure
out.
What
are
the
next
steps
from
here
when
we
are
expecting
this
repo
split?
Is
there
any
new,
PR
or
maths
initial
PR
still
hold
good
or
anything
that
we
would
like
to
share
with
the
community
in
form
of
announcement
or
updates
on
this.
D
C
B
We
can
schedule
the
call
I'll
send
out
an
invite
or
something
this
week.
A
Can
we
like
expect
the
call
in
between
the
next
EAP
call
and
today
so
we
can
have
some
updates
for
the
next
meeting
and
I
can
put
it
up
on
this
and
therefore
yeah.
A
We
do
have
Greg
on
the
call,
although
he
mentioned,
that
his
connections
keeps
dropping
I
wanted
to
check
about
the
pr
7230
Greg
that
a
pull
request
by
you
about
EIP
pain
relief.
Do
we
still
want
to
discuss
that?
Do
you
want
to
close
it
where
we
are
on
that.
E
Pieces
of
it
are
showing
up
in
this
other
work
and
I'm,
not
sure
what
status
to
put
it
in.
It's
not
exactly
withdrawn
I.
Guess
it's
just
a
PR,
so
it
can
sit
there.
E
Yeah
I
think
I'm,
pretty
close
to
satisfied
that,
what's
in
there
is,
is
making
it
in
to
the
the
various
decisions
we're
making,
but
it
would
take
some
review
but,
like
I
said,
the
moves
a
horror
show
and
my
girlfriend's
health
is
has
been
collapsing
stage
by
stage.
So
unfortunately,
I
just
have
not
been
able
to
give
this
any
attention
at
a
fairly
crucial
time
and
all
I
can
do
is
apologize
for
that.
A
No
worries,
I,
hope
things
get
better
at
your
time.
Just
curious.
If
you
find
some
of
the
pain
points
are
being
addressed
with
other
pull
requests,
there
could
be
two
possible
options
if
you
do
not
want
to
continue
with
this
full
request,
you
can
close
it
perhaps
otherwise
we
can
keep
it
open,
but
if
unattended
for
over
two
months
or
so
but
may
strike-
and
it
can
go
into
stamen
and
eventually
get
close,
so
yeah
totally
open
for
that.
E
E
Well,
there
was
going
to
be,
but
I'm
not
going
to
be
able
to
make
it
to
that
one
yeah
I
mean
it
could
just
be
closed.
The
information
is
there
and
no
it's
not
going
to
get
merged
as
it
stands.
E
A
D
A
A
60
is
a
big
number
for
proposals
moving
into
stagnant.
We
understand
that
is
because
of
proposal
being
unattended
for
a
long
period
of
time.
I
would
take
this
opportunity
to
maybe
request
EIP
authors.
If
you
are
here,
if
you
are
making
a
pull
request
to
create
an
standard
for
ethereum
ecosystem,
please
stick
around.
If
you
have
questions,
we
do
have
EIP
editing
office
hour.
That
happens
every
other
Tuesday.
Please
check
out
eipip
GitHub
repository
issue
section
for
the
next
meeting
and
please
come
up
there
with
your
questions.
A
A
We
can
check
out
eipsinsite.com
with
details
of
all
eits
in
different
statuses
proposals.
In
last
call
we
request
EIT
authors
to
make
a
pull
request
after
the
deadline
is
completed
to
move
the
proposal
to
the
final
status
be
sure
that
the
pr
contains
only
the
status
change.
If
there
are
more
changes
with
the
pull
request,
we
would
like
to
review
it,
and
perhaps
we
can
extend
the
review
period.
So
we
get
everything
sorted
before
we
finally
move
the
proposal
to
the
final
status.
A
The
next
one
is
eib
editing
office
hour,
as
I
mentioned,
we
organize
this
meeting
every
two
weeks
recording
from
the
meeting
25
has
been
added
and
agenda
for
meeting
26
is
up
there.
Please
take
a
look
and
add
your
pull
request
if
you
have
any
and
that
pretty
much
summarizes
all
the
items
listed
for
today.
A
Anyone
has
anything
to
bring
up
I,
see
a
question
here
in
the
chat
I'm
sorry.
A
Unfortunately,
this
is
naughty
meeting
where
we
look
into
the
full
request
for
draft
and
review.
If
there
is
any
final
EIP,
we
consider
only
those
EIP
for
discussion
here.
However,
thank
you
for
sharing
this
I
hope.
This
circle
request
will
be
reviewed
by
EIP
editors
in
case
of
any
help.
Please
reach
out
on
ethereum
Caterers
discount.