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

historic-blockhashes #2427

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

zmitton
Copy link

@zmitton zmitton commented Dec 4, 2019

I believe the contract implementation strategy is what held this up (EIP #210). Lets keep it simple. We won't have to worry about complex "stuffing" processes this way. And clients already have this data, so it should be relatively easy.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 8, 2020

There has been no activity on this pull request for two months. It will be closed in a week if no further activity occurs. If you would like to move this EIP forward, please respond to any outstanding feedback or add a comment indicating that you have addressed all required feedback and are ready for a review.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Sep 8, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@MicahZoltu MicahZoltu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Along with the suggested changes, this EIP also needs all of the sections found in the template: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ethereum/EIPs/master/eip-template.md

Is there still interest in this over https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-2935 ? If not, it may be worthwhile to consolidate effort into one of the two.

EIPS/eip-2427.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
EIPS/eip-2427.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
EIPS/eip-2427.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
micahzoltu suggested changes

Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>
@zmitton
Copy link
Author

zmitton commented Sep 10, 2020

I posted this nearly a year ago after aggregating the best research from multiple other EIPs (themselves over 3 years old). Didn't receive so much as a single comment until now. Might as well just close this one because Vitalik has written one now which will probably actually be payed attention to.

@zmitton zmitton closed this Sep 10, 2020
@lightclient
Copy link
Member

@zmitton do you have any feedback on how this process can be improved? It is really unfortunate this EIP received no traction when you authored it. Did you share this with anyone in the community (e.g. twitter, eth magicians, etc)?

@zmitton
Copy link
Author

zmitton commented Oct 21, 2020

I guess my suggestion is that the person assigned to review it, does so. It was clear there was interest, so that means it should get moved to the next step of the process, or given a reason why not?

@MicahZoltu
Copy link
Contributor

We have a had a problem historically of editors not proactively reading EIPs, which meant the only way to get them through the process was to find and pester an editor to read your EIP and review it. We have gotten better and started to work through the backlog, but editors are still greatly understaffed so this generally continues to be a problem.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants